The official Rich Harden is SICK and the most underrated player in baseball Thread

me o my wrote:

You can also give up 4 hits per inning and never give up a run. You could have a huge whip and OPS and never give up a run. Tell me who would you rather have at the end of the season

PLayer A: 0.00 ERA 4.0 WHIP, 2.0 OPS

Player B: 9.00 era with a 1.0 whip and a .333 OPS

Obviously player A because THE POINT OF THE GAME IS TO OUTSCORE your opponents not get more people on base.

By that logic, wins are in fact the most important statistic because as Herm Edwards says: YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!! A starting pitcher has the most control over winning and losing of every player on the field.

Would you rather have Pitcher A: 19-9, 241 innings,3.21 ERA, 1.15 WHIP - CC last year. Or Pitcher B 8-3, 146 innings, 2.10 ERA, 1.10 WHIP - Harden's pace for this year?

You cannot seriously pick 8 wins over 19.

Harden is 0-1. CC is 4-0. This is not close. Not at all. You're going to nit pick over 1/3 of a run per 9 innings (cough luck cough) but not acknowledge 4 wins over two weeks? That's flat out mindless stupidity. The difference of 1 run every THIRTY innings is pretty meaningless next to the differences in every other category.

ERA is not all that important. That is all.

Baseball dude,

You are confusing run support with "being a good pitcher". Obviously, the deeper a good pitcher goes in a game, the better chance his team has to win. But using Wins as a metric for success is idiotic. Right now, Vicente Padilla has 12 wins for the Rangers. His ERA is 4.56, and his ERA+ is 91 (which is park adjusted). The average pitcher in the big leagues has an ERA+ of 100. So he's 9 percent below average. Johan Santana has 8 wins, but his ERA is 3.05, WHIP 1.21, and his ERA+ is 135. So despite the fact that Padilla lets up 1.5 more runs per game than Santana, his team is scoring more, so he's getting more wins. Are you really going to say that Padilla has been a better pitcher because his team scored more runs for him? This is pretty simple logic.

The Cubs are tied 2-2 in the 12th right now. Harden got a ND. That doesn't mean he's a bad pitcher--if the Cubs had scored 18 runs and he allowed 5, he would have gotten the Win he would have thrown a much worse game.

I never said that wins was a good metric of pitching ability. I was sarcastically using his logic when he said ERA was the most important stat.

I also never said Harden was a bad pitcher, just that he isn't as good as CC. Pitching more innings gives a pitcher much greater control over if his team wins or loses. That's why CC is better.

Just looking at wins is not a good indicator of how good a guy has been, but ignoring them completely isn't a good idea either.

me o my wrote:

You can also give up 4 hits per inning and never give up a run. You could have a huge whip and OPS and never give up a run. Tell me who would you rather have at the end of the season

PLayer A: 0.00 ERA 4.0 WHIP, 2.0 OPS

Player B: 9.00 era with a 1.0 whip and a .333 OPS

Obviously player A

Wow. I missed this the first time through, but it might be the single stupidest thing I have read in my entire life. Yep. I'm pretty sure it is.

First, the numbers you made up are physically impossible unless the sample size consists of 1 inning or something like that so you really could not tell which pitcher was better. But based on the numbers, I'd still take player B. A .333 OPS is crazy good. anything under .600 will win you the CY Young most years.

Do you think that pitchers have some sort of magical ability to strand runners or control when they give up extra base hits? Because that's basically what you are saying.

You really are retarded! that is the conclusion I have come to. Of course I was using extremes and they are possible.

This is the dumbest thing I have ever read:

"But based on the numbers, I'd still take player B. A .333 OPS is crazy good. anything under .600 will win you the CY Young most years."

You think any pitcher with a 9.00 era would win a cy young no matter what his OPS was? No way.

Someone with a 0.00 era would win the cy young no matter what his other numbers were. You're an idiot.

If we were looking at CY young voting era is historically much much much much much more important than OPS.

Thank you baseball dud for having some sense.

CC's ERA for the entire season is 3.30. Harden's is 2.10. It isnt close. Harden has pitched better all season.

I'm sure Harden's bullpen enjoyed picking up that 7 innings of relief today--in another losing effort. Ask Lou who he'd rather have.

You either have not completely thought this through or you're an idiot.

The pitchers job is to keep runs off the board. He has no control over what his teammates on offense do.

Sabathia's the better pitcher. Harden just doesn't pitch enough innings.

Throughout all of this, you have managed to miss the point.

ERA is not a good indicator because it was so volatile that luck greatly affects it. That's why WHIP is better.

Then you went and made up some truly insane numbers that could never happen for a period of time longer than it takes you to suck Harden off.

Here's what would have to happen for your numbers to happen for 30 starts: pitcher B would have to just get hammered for about 10 starts allow where he gives up 20 runs per start and EVERY RUNNER THAT REACHES BASE SCORES. His remaining 20 starts would all be perfect games. I'm pretty sure that would win the CY Young.

Pitcher A would have to allow 4 base runners every inning and somehow avoid a run scoring which means that every inning he would need either a double play, a pickoff, a caught stealing or more than likely, an error. That's right the only way this is really possible over 30 starts is if he was the victim of 1000s and 1000s of errors. This errors would lead to runs - almost certainly more runs than pitcher B allowed. They'd be unearned runs, but they'd still be runs, and as some numb nuts stated earlier in this thread, the pitcher's whole goal is to stop runs from being scored. All these runs would cause fictional pitcher A to lose almost every game he entered, and someone with a record like 2 and 18 would not win the CY Young even if his ERA was 0.00.

More likely to win the CY:

Pitcher A: 2-18 0.00 ERA, 150 walks, 250 hits, 100 innings.

Or pitcher B: 20-10 9.00 ERA, 150 walks 50 hits, no extra base hits, 200 innings, 20 perfect games.

Pitcher A would have no chance in hell and no one would campaign for him. Pitcher B would be an absolute lock because true baseball minds would throw out his 10 or so horrible outings and focus on his 20 perfect games.

Go ahead. Make up some scenario where your numbers would win the CY for pitcher A assuming both must have 30 starts.

No, no pitcher with a 9.00 era would win the cy young. Period.

Overtime luck averages out. Have you ever heard someone say well Greg Maddux's 1996 ERA was a lucky 2.21. NO. There are plenty of pitchers with higher whips than better pitchers with lower whips. That is why no one cares about whips when voting for cy youngs.

Again Harden's Era this year 2.10

Sabathia's 3.30

Not Even Close.

Just to let you know Harden has a better whip than CC anyway this season.

You obviously have never taken statistics. Let me explain to you the concept of an outlier. An outlier is a number that is unlike the rest of the data (either too high or two low) that skews the averages in one direction or the other. They are especially relevant in small sample sizes.

CC's first 4 starts this season were outliers which make his ERA and overall averages in general are an inaccurate assessment of his pitching ability. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Also, no pitcher with a WHIP of 4.0 would ever start more than a few games. Anyone over 1.50 doesn't last long.

Dice it up however you want, but since the trade the Brew crew has made up ground like mad and are now tied for the division lead. They are 4-0 in CC's starts, the Cubs are 1-2 in Harden's. CC has rested the bullpen, Harden has made it work harder.

So far you have used the following flawed arguments:

1. He is one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball and much better than CC.

No one who knows anything about baseball will support you on this one.

2. Harden was taken out of start number 2 because they had an 8 run lead.

As stated previously it was actually because his pitch count was high and he was starting to lose command.

3. A pitcher's goal is to allow fewest runs per inning.

Actually it is to do everything they can to help the team win. CC has done more.

4. My favorite: Pitcher A/Pitcher B

Still laughing about that.

5. Did you really just try to compare Harden to Maddux.

Yes when he is healthy he is one of the 5 best pitchers in baseball. I will say it again.

yes he is better than CC.

harden's era in his last 5 seasons is well under 3.00. Same cant be said for CC. Hardens era this year 2.10. CC's should jump up to around 3.45.

I did not compare harden to Maddux and only and idiot would think I did if you read my text.

What happened to CC tonight moron?

He easily could have given up 6 or 7 earned runs. 11 men reached base in 6.2 in. 3 K's. Poor poor outing.

In Harden's last 12 innings he has allowed ready... 3 hits and struck out 20 men.

Some people see things before they become popular knowledge and have the faith in their intellect to put their ideas out there.

Others listen to what the majority of others say and spinelessly agree because it is popular.

Keep popping off about how much better CC is and see where it gets you.

God, you're a dork.

Cubs -1 CC Sabathia- 0

Shhhhhhhh.

Are you honestly comparing Harden's ERA to Sabathia's ERA over the past FIVE seasons? Are you including the one where Sabathia won the Cy Young? Where was Harden then? Ohh, on the DL. Like he's been for the past five seasons. I guarantee if Harden had the same number of IP's as Sabathia, his vaunted ERA would be substantially higher, but he doesn't, because he's injured...all the time.

Yes I am. Yes I am and Harden still has a better ERA. CC's career era is 3.78. Very average. When CC won the cy young his era was only 3.21. It was a down year pitching in the AL. But because you have no idea what you are talking about you say oh my god he won a cy young he must be amazing, one of the greatest ever. His career era is 3.78.

Your guarantee is both meaningless and worthless. Take note. As I have indicated time and time again in this thread he is better WHEN HEALTHY! I have never said he hasn't been injured in the past or he is never going to be injured again. Only he is dominant when he does pitch. His last four years of pitching his era is under three probably a full run lower than CC's career era.

Watch him pitch. He has given up 3 hits in his last 12 innings pitched with 20 k's. 30 k's in 3 starts with the Cubs.

his last four years of pitching have been under 3 because he's pitched 25, 46, 128, and 189 innings respectively PER SEASON since 2004. This season, in 16 starts, Harden has gone to 8 innings once, has never gone to 9, and has gone under 6 innings seven times. That's a one way ticket to a blown up bullpen (which is where the Cubs are headed. Case in point, Marmol and Wood.)

In 23 games, Sabathia has 5 complete games, and has gone under 6 innings four times, all four of which were the first 4 starts of the season. That means the team that Sabathia is pitching for has "the most dominant pitcher" on the mound for much more of the game the team Harden is pitching for. In other words, any time Harden is pitching, when you get to the 6th, you'll be facing the bullpen, which, over the course of the season will wear down trying eat up the innings Harden can't pitch.