W vs QS

[Yoda]

My bigger complaint with QS isn't the 6 IP/3 ER example... It's the 8 IP/4 ER example. Same ERA, no QS.

The ER aspect of QS actually penalizes a pitcher for going past 6 IP. It should be based on ERA.

Agreed

[Madison]

My bigger complaint with QS isn't the 6 IP/3 ER example... It's the 8 IP/4 ER example. Same ERA, no QS.

The ER aspect of QS actually penalizes a pitcher for going past 6 IP. It should be based on ERA.

Agreed

Same here, but the ERA "requirement" should be dropped to below 4.00. 6 innings, 3 runs, for a 4.50 ERA isn't "quality" in my eyes.

[StlSluggers]

Well, you're kinda screwed with the integer nature of baseball. You either get 6 IP/3 ER (4.50 ERA), 7 IP/3 ER (4.29 ERA), 6 IP/2 ER (3.00 ERA), and 7 IP/2 ER (2.57 ERA). I think a 3 or 3-minus ERA isn't quality; it's superior. For the same reason, you can't expect 8 innings out of a pitcher, either.

A 4.50 ERA is certainly not great, but I think it's "quality" in an offensive era like this. I wouldn't complain if it went to 7/3, but no matter what, I think it should be based on ERA. 8/4 is, imo, better than 6/3.

[Yoda]

Should be 7 IP. I think going 6 is taxing the bull pen since you are most likely using 3 more pitchers to finish up the game.

[Grounded Polo]

I feel a need to emphasize the word "quality," as in the pitcher does enough to put his team in a position to win and not neccessarily pitch a complete game shutout. Any offense should be able to match 3 runs over 6 innings unless they're playing poorly. Anything more than 6 IP/3 ER qualifies as a dominant outing and the pitcher's offense didn't have to do much of anything to win the game.

[Yoda]

FWIW, MLB average runs scored in 07 = 777. Divide that by 162 G and you have 4.796 R/G.

So I guess I am ok with a 4.50 ERA. I still think 6 IP is a bit short in terms of a decent outing.

[tmlfan4ever]

FWIW, MLB average runs scored in 07 = 777. Divide that by 162 G and you have 4.796 R/G.

So I guess I am ok with a 4.50 ERA. I still think 6 IP is a bit short in terms of a decent outing.

That means you are rewarding an "average", not "decent" outing.

[JTWood]

FWIW, MLB average runs scored in 07 = 777. Divide that by 162 G and you have 4.796 R/G.

So I guess I am ok with a 4.50 ERA. I still think 6 IP is a bit short in terms of a decent outing.

That means you are rewarding an "average", not "decent" outing.

So define quality for us then.

[flloyd]

I don't buy the argument that since a pitcher can have a 4.50 ERA in a game an still get a QS it is invalid. First you have to remember that that is the worst case scenario. Second, pitchers get credited with wins when they have significantly worse games. Andy Pettitte for example earned a W while pitching 5 innings with 0 Ks and 8 ERs last September.

In actuality in 2005, the average QS had an ERA of 2.04 and the average non-QS had an average ERA of 7.70. I think despite its faults, Quality Starts as a stat has a lot more value than Wins. I like it particularly as a fantasy stat since only starters can earn them and relief pitchers don't scrape vulture wins that are mostly a result of luck rather than pitching skill.

[Yoda]

I don't buy the argument that since a pitcher can have a 4.50 ERA in a game an still get a QS it is invalid. First you have to remember that that is the worst case scenario. Second, pitchers get credited with wins when they have significantly worse games. Andy Pettitte for example earned a W while pitching 5 innings with 0 Ks and 8 ERs last September.

In actuality in 2005, the average QS had an ERA of 2.04 and the average non-QS had an average ERA of 7.70. I think despite its faults, Quality Starts as a stat has a lot more value than Wins. I like it particularly as a fantasy stat since only starters can earn them and relief pitchers don't scrape vulture wins that are mostly a result of luck rather than pitching skill.

Nice...