The "Wins and Losses" Farce

One of the key metrics for evaluating a pitcher in baseball is their record of wins and losses. It is essentially an accounting of how many runs opponents scored off the pitcher and his 8 defensive teammates relative to the number of runs the pitcher's 9-man batting order scored during the time when the pitcher was in the game. If it sounds like the pitcher plays only a fractional part (albeit an important fraction) in the final outcome, that is because it is so.

So why do we continue to track and consider this statistic as important? Obviously, good pitchers on poor teams can out-perform bad pitchers on strong teams and have an inferior Win/Loss record. It makes no sense.

Unless you look at it in relative terms.

Relative to the trend of looking at Win/Loss records for NFL quarterbacks, rating pitchers on that measure seems comparatively brilliant. Of course that is only due to the unfathomable absurdity of hanging a win or a loss for a 53-man football team on one player.

It is all over the news today. With last night's win over the Packers, Favre has become the first QB to defeat all 32 active NFL football teams in his career. I guess he did it all by himself. Forget the fact that the Vikings held the Packers to zero points through three trips to the red-zone and had 3 take-aways in the game. Forget the special teams play. Forget football's best running back, Adrian Peterson, who drew a stacked box all night and opened up the passing lanes for a talented core of Vikings receivers. Forget all the coaching, and scheming, and game-planning, and play-calling. Favre did it alone.

How can smart guys, who played the game and then became analysts, spew this crap? I can tolerate it in baseball because sometimes a pitcher throws nine innings of excellence and deserves recognition as the key contributor to a win. But in football, I cannot abide this emerging trend.

Switch Pitcher

Contributed by Auggie
--------------------------------

As a young baseball fan I would often bat opposite handed in the hopes of becoming a legitimate switch hitter. Then I had the bright idea “what if I could throw with both hands”? What an advantage that would be - simply switch hands depending on which side of the plate the batter was hitting from. Not to mention the arm strain you could save by switching it up. Why hadn’t anyone done this yet?

I immediately set out to improve the coordination in my ‘other’ hand by performing a multitude of daily tasks. It wasn’t easy but I was a determined young fool. Then one day while enjoying a hearty plate of macaroni and cheese I over shot my target and accidently performed rhinoplasty surgery on myself with a fork. I realized then what a daunting task it would be to develop the requisite coordination in this arm. If I couldn’t even feed myself then punching out Wade Boggs with a nasty slider down and away seemed like, well, too much work really.

Now I am happy to report there is hope of witnessing this phenomenon. A forward-thinking father realized that to develop these skills you need to start young, and so he trained his son to throw with both hands at a very early age as told in this story by ESPN’s Rick Reilly. I for one will be watching with interest.

More Good Baseball Trivia

Here you go imaginary readers -- let's see if anyone can dethrone Pete Dore.

Question: Who is the only pitcher in MLB history to have won 2 "Game 7's" in the world series?

As with the last trivia, the answer is a notable MLB player.

Remember the "answer code"; it is written backwards with a "b" on either side of each letter

Answer: bnbosbbbibgb bbbobbb

Why Do Pitchers Wind-Up?

In the old days, ball players thought pitchers could generate more velocity with a wind-up. However, that notion was briskly dispelled once Bryce K. Brown invented the radar gun.

So why has it persisted? There are obvious disadvantages in forcing pitchers to master two deliveries and two sets of mechanics. Why not just pitch from the stretch all the time?

There may be some advantage in making hitters learn to pick up the pitcher's release from two motions. If so, why not have a half-dozen motions? Why not change with every pitch?

I find it odd that the wind-up has persisted even though the founding premise of its origin has been proven false.