HOOTIE wrote:Personally, i think the definition of a quality start is stupid. One, 6 innings 3 runs, is a 4.50 era. Why reward a guy for that? Thats over the league era btw. Two, it would have to be altered for the hitting era at the time. Imagine if used in the 60s. Third, why penalize a guy for 9 innings 4 runs (4 era), but reward a guy for 3 in 6 (4.50 era)?
Well, you're not wrong here, but in terms of pitchers stats, I prefer a QS to a "win" stat. If someone ends up with a 4.5 ERA and 25 QS, then I guess I'm a moron-- that's not good-- but in most cases, historically speaking, the QS's go to the best pitchers (who end up with lower ERAs than 4.5, but you're right, 4.5 is high if someone were to take it on a game by game basis); secondly, the WIN has so much to do with the team the pitcher plays for that in the league I run I wanted to make pitchers on less-impressive teams still useful fantasy pitchers. See Adam Eaton or Oliver Perez or any of a few. In our league we give 4 pts for a QS and 5 for a win, which means, in essence, you don't get a really good night out of your pithcer unless you get both a QS and a win, which seems fair. Those 6ER wins drive me crazy when someone gets a ton of points for them.