6 comments Murray Chass: Hater of All Things Numerical

I want to do a quick Saturday post for this weekend. Murry Chass is a friend of this blog...in that he isn't a friend of this blog because he is a closed-minded person when it comes to using statistics that have been created since 1972 to evaluate baseball players. You don't have to love statistics, but to ignore the impact they have on the game and how they can be used to advance the study of how baseball players perform more accurately and effectively is ignorant. He's like a Senator railing against Communists in the 1950's because he just randomly hates a group of people or a racist in the 1960's who refuses to let go of his beliefs that are RIGHT dammit, because that's the way it has always been and it was better that way.

Murray is feeling a little vindicated about Zack Greinke having a tough year. Greinke is currently 0-4 with an embarrassing 2.51 ERA, a pathetic 1.050 WHIP and an ERA+ of a terrible 164. In short, this obviously means he didn't deserve the Cy Young Award last year.

The stats freaks who never saw a decimal point they didn’t worship were ecstatic last year when Zack Greinke won the American League Cy Young award while winning only 16 games.

Because it was the right fucking decision. That is why "stats freaks" were happy, happy along with any other person that understands a pitcher's win-loss total also depends on how well his team hits. I will ask again, how is this hard to understand? I have never understood how the MVP has to come from the best, or one of the best, teams in the National and American League. Anyone who saw Greinke pitch last year should be happy he didn't get punished in the Cy Young voting for how bad his team was.

Zack Greinke was the best pitcher in the American League last year. Statistics or even anyone who watched him pitch could see this. "Only" winning 16 games is impressive when you play for a team that won "only" 65 games. He got credit for a 1/4 of his team's wins and deserved more wins than that. He had better statistics than the other pitchers in the running for the Cy Young and was more dominant than the other pitchers in the running. "Stats freak" or normal human beings with a brain could see this...and they did, which is why he won.

Felix Hernandez, who won 19 and whose 2.49 earned run average was second to Greinke’s 2.16, would have been my choice,

For what reason does Chass chose Hernandez over Greinke? We will never know, except Hernandez won more games...which as I have explained many times is a retarded reason to vote for one pitcher over another if that is the deciding reason for the vote. Let's compare numbers and see why a person would vote for Felix Hernandez over Zack Greinke...other than that person is over 60 years old and is protesting the use of statistics:

Zack Greinke: 16-8, 2.16 ERA, 1.073 WHIP, 229.1 IP, 242 strikeouts, 51 walks, 7.7 H/9, ERA+ 205 and 3 shutouts.

Felix Hernandez: 19-5, 2.49 ERA, 1.135 WHIP, 238.2 IP, 217 strikeouts, 71 walks, 7.5 H/9, ERA+ 174 and 1 shutout.

Even using the "old" numbers of dominance, Zack Greinke was the better pitcher last year. He pitched a few less innings, had more strikeouts, less walks, and was overall the better pitcher. That's just using the "old" stats that Murray Chass probably used. Wins is really the only category where Hernandez had a large advantage, but I've already covered how this is stupid to judge Greinke negatively because of this.

Zach Greinke has a pretty good claim to the 2009 Cy Young award, no matter how bitter Murray Chass is about it.

but the stats guys “proved” that Greinke was the correct choice because of his statistical standing in formulaic concoctions in which we mere mortals do not imbibe.

I have enjoyed the idea perpetuated that the stats used by "stats freaks" are too complicated to understand. First off, you don't have to know how exactly to calculate them to use them, so it is not like you need a degree from Harvard to use them effectively...you just have to try and understand them. That takes effort, which many "old school" journalists refuse to exert in an effort to cling desperately to the past.

More likely what Murray means by this comment is that he is too damn lazy to learn how to use the "new stats." In any other profession this would not be valued and he would be ridiculed and looked at with scorn, but in sports journalism it is seen as holding on to the past and is adored. Go figure.

I can’t wait to see what they will do with Greinke’s record this year. He has started seven games and has won none of them.

OMG! That means he sucks and shouldn't have won the Cy Young Award in 2009! Murray Chass should hurry up and tell the voters this, maybe they can get a re-vote going and overturn this travesty of a vote.

He has lost four. He has a respectable e.r.a. of 2.51, but he is the first returning Cy Young winner, Elias Sports Bureau says, to fail to win any of his first seven starts since Frank Viola in 1989.

Which as any sane person without an agenda could see, IS NOT ZACK GREINKE'S FAULT. How in the hell can anyone blame a pitcher with a sub-3.00 ERA for not winning a game?

2.51 is not a respectable ERA, it would have been the 3rd best ERA in the entire American League last year. It is a great ERA.

I am still miffed over the use of this word. Respectable? It's so clear that Murray Chass has an agenda against the use of new statistics and therefore any player that wins an award which he thinks was won because of new-fangled statistics he will immediately dislike. Calling a 2.51 ERA "respectable" is beyond absurd. That is a fantastic ERA, especially in the American League.

Let's look at Greinke's run-support this year:

He is receiving 2.39 runs per start, which is absolutely pathetic.

Game 1: Royals lost 8-4 where Greinke gave up 2 runs.
Game 2: Royals lost 8-3 where Greinke gave up 4 runs.
Game 3: Royals lost 10-3 where Greinke gave up 4 runs.
Game 4: Royals won 4-3 where Greinke gave up 2 runs.
Game 5: Royals lost 3-2 where Greinke gave up 0 runs.
Game 6: Royals lost 1-0 where Greinke gave up 1 run.
Game 7: Royals lost 4-1 where Greinke gave up 3 runs.

Isn't it weird how in every game this year runs have been scored by the opposition after Greinke left the game? Over the 7 games he has pitched in, there have been an average of 3.14 runs scored by the opposing team AFTER he has left the game...or more runs have been scored after he has left the game than the run support he has been given this year while he was in the game.

In other words, the opposing team has scored more runs in the 16.1 innings after Greinke has left the game than the Royals have scored in the 46.2 innings he has been in the game.

It is almost like he isn't completely to blame for his team losing. Perhaps Murray Chass should focus on how bad the Royals bullpen has been. In the three cases the bullpen didn't blow up. In one case the Royals didn't score the entire game and Greinke lost by giving up 1 run and in the other case the Royals offense scored 1 run...and the Royals won the other game. It's ridiculous to blame Greinke for this or even suggest he is somewhat to blame for not winning a game this year.

In Greinke’s April 27 start against Seattle, he allowed no runs in seven innings and left with a 2-0 lead, but the Mariners scored three runs in the eighth against Josh Rupe and won, 3-2.

In his next start, against Tampa Bay, Greinke gave up only one run in eight innings, but it was an Evan Longoria home run and it was the only run of the game.

Earlier in this motive-filled crap-fest, Murray Chass asked this question:

I can’t wait to see what they will do with Greinke’s record this year.

I think he just answered his own question by showing two instances where Greinke has gotten screwed by the bullpen and his offense. "What we will do" is show that Greinke has had terrible luck this year and it in no way reflects on him as a pitcher. It's not his fault he can't drive runs in or pitch a complete game every time out, because those are the only two ways I could think to blame Greinke for currently not having won a game.

If anything, Greinke's record this year shows just how well he pitched last year to have won 16 games when pitching for the Royals and why he rightfully won the Cy Young award. Murray Chass should be embarrassed to try and say Greinke is less of a pitcher because he hasn't won a game this year.

27 comments I Liked Jim Rice Better Before He Got Into The HOF

UPDATE: It seems Joe Posnanski saw the exact same thing and is hopefully preparing a strong rebuttal that will probably blow the doors off mine. Stay tuned.

If theres one dude you dont want hearing about the smack you've been talking about Greinke, its Joe.

Hello everyone. Gosh, its been a long time since I've posted. Sorry, I've been busy with some things lately. What could possibly be more important than posting on a blog that I don't get paid to write on, you might ask? I'm glad you did. Well, I happened to be cruising car dealerships to look at cars and I stopped at one and came away with this beauty.




Yup, I bought a brand new 2010 Camaro, as you can see it proudly displayed in my mothers basement. But anyways I had to go through the pain in the ass process of getting it registered in NH to avoid getting killed by RI taxes, so I've been busy the past couple of weeks. Well, that and I've been playing Smokey and the Bandit with it since I got it.

Okay, now that I've got that out of the way, on to more important matters. Some of you might remember Jim Rice basically talking smack about Derek Jeter and a bunch of other ball players to some little league kids. In a nutshell it was along the lines of "they arent half as good as the players back in my day, I was dominant and feared, blah blah blah.....". Well, Mr. Rice has a blog and on it he made an interesting observation about Zack Grienke.

Greinke is a Good Pitcher-Not Dominant

To this I say: Jim Rice was a Good Ballplayer-Not Dominant. Really, Jim Rice? Now your going to start talking shit about Zack? This coming from the man who got elected into the HOF from a bunch of boston sportswriters lobbying the supposed "fear" he put into opposing pitchers? Nevermind the fact that Dick Allen, Albert Bell, hell, even Ron Santos has a better Cooperstown argument then you do.

Zack Greinke didn’t really impress me last night. He pitched well and maybe I caught him on a bad night, but to me he didn’t seem dominant.

Keeping in mind the fact that he is one start removed from having a Miguel Cabrera line drive hit him in the elbow, Zack threw six shutout innings, allowing only 2 hits, striking out 5 and walking 0. Maybe not his most dominant performance but, he did shut down one of the most potent lineups in the league. What? Theres more? Okay.

Greinke has may have the lowest ERA in the AL since Pedro Martinez in 2000, but he doesn’t strike me as the dominant force that Pedro was during his statistical peak.

Its kind of unfair to compare Greinke to a pitcher that had one of the most dominant pitching runs IN MLB HISTORY, dont you think, Jim? I mean, christ. After the game his ERA stood at 2.08. That is insane. He is 2nd in the league in K's and first in just about every meaningful statistic.

Don’t get me wrong, Greinke pitched very effectively but he was not the unhittable beast on the mound that Pedro or Clemens (or even Johan Santana) were during their reign of dominance.

Actually, I think I am getting you wrong. You are basically telling me that instead of being one of the best pitchers in the league, he is just.....meh. Not to mention, this is the only game you have seen him in this year. You know he does pitch to others teams besides those that reside in the AL East, right?

Side Rant: Why does it matter that he hasnt pitched that much to teams in the AL East? The AL Central has some really good hitters, too. Cabrera, Mauer, Morneau, Konerko, Thome (when he was still with the ChiSox), Beckham, Choo.....This seems to be the argument idiots make when saying they will not vote for him. Well, that and he doesnt have enough wins, which, I guess, is even stupider.

He only gave up two hits in 6 innings but struggled with his command and, with 5 strikeouts, it’s not like he was punching tickets up and down the Red Sox lineup

Yes. He struggled with his command WHILE WALKING ZERO BATTERS!!!!ZERO!!! He also struck out a little less than 1 per inning. What did you want, 10K's against one of the better hitting teams in the league? Plus he was one start removed from getting smacked on the elbow by a line drive. Man, Jim, its a good thing the HOF doesnt have the standards you have, eh?

He reminds me of a right-handed Roger Moret. He has that long and lean frame but good speed on his fastball and sporadic command.

Roger Moret: Career ERA+ 108. Career High ERA+ 128 Highest K Total: 111

Zack Greinke: Career ERA+120 Career High ERA+ sitting at 210 this year Highest K total: 229 and counting this year.

Where are the similarities? I mean, asides from them both having long and lean frames. Its like comparing Dustin Pedroia to David Eckstein (all hail the mighty ball of grit) even though the only thing similar is they are short and white.

How the fuck can you call Greinke good but not dominant based on one start? Jim Rice: Congrats on being elected into the HOF, but please stop writing stupid entries, such as this one, on your blog.