bigh0rt wrote:Is there any data out there comparing individual QS to W among SP across seasons (or hell, even 1 would at least be cool)? Comparing the differential between number of QS a pitcher puts up and how many W they earn? I'd be interested to see some of the extremes, the averages, etc.
The problem here is that like ender was getting at neither is particularly good. Wins is overrated and QS underrated but that is only relative to their actual worth for a pitcher. It is hard to find this stuff because its somewhat a waste of time even if it would be interesting. Just like I was mildly curious the relationship between slugging% and average earlier this offseason as relates to player value but its not really the type of thing that is going to be looked at. Avg and Wins are pretty far from the stats that people doing research are interested in. I have read that pitchers generally win about 75 percent of their QS but from what I remember its far from static. It would be relatively easy to put together a simplistic measure of this but it might not give you much on what you really want know.
A few possibilities from eyeballing the top lists from last year. To me the top QS people look as a group more consistent to be good in era/whip. If you know wins you can make a pretty good guess on QS. If you know QS then wins is still a crapshoot. All three I would have expected.
One other point QS do have some bias, park for example, but you can draft for that just like people are saying you can draft for teams with offenses. The main difference is that the QS bias are going to be a lot less unpredictable. You flat out cannot predict relief wins and run support for a singular pitcher is surprisingly hard. How a park plays especially for a certain pitcher substantially less hard to predict. It still boils down to preference.
As long as you are not park adjusting, which you will not be in fantasy, then no matter what you do you are always going to be looking at a list that is only so good compared to real life value.