Fenway Punk wrote:mr anderson... wrote:

for instance: there were 1198 saves, 1993 holds, and 2410 wins for the entire imported player pool. my reasoning tells me that due to the disparity between these categories, a save will be twice as effective at winning its respective category versus a win due to it being twice as scarce, and subsequently that a relief pitcher with 5 wins and 10 saves will be 39.9% more effective (valuable) as a relief pitcher with 5 wins and 10 holds.

id=0B5XYzuCghXJXNTgyZDQ3ZWEtMTE3MS00MmRhLTlhN2EtMmVjMWQ2N2ViYjhl&sort=name&layout=list&num=50

I disagree with this, respectfully. Since you also count W, K, K/9, and QS, I would think that SP weigh alot heavier on the outcome than a RP. I get that since there are less saves than they are wins, that saves could be more effective (in theory) but I think many may take this message the wrong way. I can easily see a beginner reading this and taking away that because saves are less abundant, it's better to have more closers than SPs. Also, your entire arguement and theory is based upon a certain statistical setting, so you would have to be playing under these exact same settings to follow this logic to a T. Great stuff though. "Baseball layed by the ambidexterous, understood by the poindexterous. "

i agree whole-heartedly : i was just mainly comparing relief pitchers against one another in that small example (was using a flawed calc at the time but the principle still stands that 1 save is twice as valuable as 1 win, but by no means does that mean a reliever is twice as valuable. i apologize that i didnt make it clear in my original post