Could we have actually still be in the Wild Card race?
I decided to take a look at the WAR and RAR numbers if we still had Halladay. Therefore I subtract these values off the cumulative fifth starters - Scrabble, Eveland, Litsch, Tallet, Mills, and Hill.
Roy Halladay
Pitching WAR: 6.8
Pitching RAR: 66
Offense WAR: -0.3
Offense RAR: -3
Total WAR: 6.5
Total RAR: 63
Marc Rzepczynski
WAR: -0.3
RAR: -2
Dana Eveland
WAR: -0.2
RAR: -3
Jesse Litsch
WAR: -0.1
RAR: -1
Brian Tallet
WAR: -1.0
RAR: -12
Brad Mills
WAR: 0.0
RAR: 0
Shawn Hill
WAR: 0.0
RAR: 0
We would have got about 8.4 wins and 81 runs more if we still had Halladay and therefore didn't have to use these pitchers this season. That would put us 7 games back of the Yankees for the AL East, and 5.5 back of the Wild Card Rays.
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No
It would just be another season of almost. Good job by AA starting the rebuild and now if we can clean out our bullpen and Buck to get more draft picks in good draft. None these A and B type free agents are core players and we can use the draft picks in a few years.
btw long time reader first time poster…great site
No
The problem I see with trying to statistically calculate how many wins the Jays would have if Halladay had been on the team this year is that is more to the game (and life) than just numbers. For instance, I’ve read a number of times over the course of this season, including yet again just recently, pitchers tactfully saying how great Halladay was, but that his leaving was a good thing for the young guys as gave them space to be loose and gel together as a group. So one or more the young pitchers may have fared worse this year under that scenario. Halladay staying totally changes the dynamic of the team this year and not necessarily for the better, as this needed to be a year to rebuild and bring up young guys.
No disrespect to the original question or anything, but just read something related that made me laugh. In his new Mail Bag in the Star, someone asked Richard Griffin for his view on the best new baseball stat(s), to which he replied:
As for stats that I prefer, fans of the mailbag know how much I am a fan of something called "wins" for starting pitchers. For those that aren’t aware, that’s when you start a game and pitch five or more innings, leave with the lead and your team hangs on to win. If pitchers put enough of these together for the same team, maybe 95-100, then that gives you a chance to play in October and maybe win a fluttery thing called a pennant that they present at the end of the year and flies high over your ballpark the next year…
Sorry
Old fashion ball fan here. I love this post! I won’t put down the people who like the new statistics, but it’s not nice to say those of us who still like the old ones are morons.
All this buttoning and unbuttoning
Felix Hernandez is a .500 pitcher this season.
Except arguably he is the best pitcher in the AL
Life as a Toronto Sports Fan?... *sigh*... It is what it is...
by JohnnyG on Sep 24, 2010 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ha ha, I got a good chuckle out of it too. Personally, I have nothing against trying to mine new kinds of statistics, but it all gets a bit too much at times and the traditionalist tries to keep it simple. Anyway, it’s all good – part of what makes baseball fun. Griffin was just needling the propeller heads a bit.
We would have got about 8.4 wins and 81 runs more if we still had Halladay and therefore didn’t have to use these pitchers this season.
Or our big four of Marcum, Romero, Cecil and Marrow might not have stepped up and turned in the kind of performances they have with the presence of Halladay helming the rotation.
What Ifs are fun but they are a long way from fact. There’s so many factors that you can’t just swap guys in and out and declare what would have been authoritatively. That being said, I doubt there’s anyone who wouldn’t have kept Halladay as a Blue Jay if it had been at all possible.
I liked Halladay and appreciated his time with him, but looking back I wouldn’t have kept even if had a choice. I really think his leaving has helped create an environment in which our young starters can gel as a group and find their MLB footing – several of them have said as much. And I’m really pumped about getting Drabek (D’Arnaud and Gose could be significant down the road too) – and that’s part of renewing your team, getting good return for your older players while you can. So I can’t say I was “happy” to see Halladay go, but it was the right decision for the right time and I wouldn’t change it even if I could.
2 Things
I don’t get how keeping a Pitcher would have let us score 88 more runs…
Secondly, we also must take Halladay’s 2010 stats with a grain of salt, ie pitching against pitchers and a far easier schedual in the NL East.
Though, I do believe Doc is the best pitcher in all of baseball. Don’t be hating.
There She Gooooooes!
Keeping a pitcher wouldn’t have let us score more than 80 runs. RAR, and WAR are based off of the principle that a run scored, is a run allowed – they are worth equal amounts and most years, approximately 10 runs above a replacement level player (scored or saved) is worth one win above replacement. Halladay would have saved 81 RAR compared to our fifth starters this year, which is worth approximately 8.4 wins (above replacement level – I think a ‘replacement level’ team is worth 48 wins a season).
As for the second point, Halladay’s WAR last season was over 7 and he’s at 6.8 this year, so I’m not too sure about the ‘grain of salt’ since he might actually be worth less this year than last.
If you read the WAR primer over at fangraphs, it explains that some of those factors are actually considered in the calculation (i.e., park factors and run environment). WAR is based off of FIP – the league average FIP is regressed to the league average ERA every season so it actually takes into account the league played in as well.
not to nitpick
but a run prevented is actually slightly better than a run saved — a ridiculous but explanatory example: Over the course of 162 games, Team A scores 332 runs and gives up 162. Team B scores 162 runs and gives up zero. Although the team’s have the same run differential, Team B will be undefeated whereas Team A will just be extremely good.
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
Wouldn’t that work the other way as well?
Team A Scores 162 and Gives up 324 Runs = -162 Run Differential
Team B Scores 0 and Gives up 162 Runs = -162 Run Differential
In this situation Team B is going to lose everygame whereas Team A will probably just be really bad, but it demonstrates that a run scored is worth more then a run saved.
We had this discussion in a fan post awhile back and it was very interesting, some people on both sides but ultimately shouldn’t they be equal?
Life as a Toronto Sports Fan?... *sigh*... It is what it is...
yes, you're correct in that
but i think we’re assuming that the team in question has a positive run-differential, otherwise there’s no chance they’d be making the playoffs, anyway.
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
yeah and what if....
we had never let Rios go last year either! we could be fighting for the pennant!
But… then Jedi never gets a chamnce to play last sept. and maybe he doesn’t gain the confidence that has allowed him to have the year he has.
In 2011 or 2012, when drabek is part of an AL east contender, we won’t be worrying about 8 more wins in 2010.
by upstate jay fan on Sep 24, 2010 12:17 PM EDT reply actions

by 























