|
|
 I was just reading the PostCards Q&A post by Derrick Goold over at the Post Dispatch and the following question was asked.
"This is a general question about baseball that has always bugged me,
and I was hoping to find an answer. When a run scores on an error by a
pitcher, it goes in the books as an unearned run. Doesn’t the pitcher
essentially “earn” that run with his throwing or fielding error?
Unearned runs exist because they are caused by a fielder, not a pitcher, but when the fielder is the pitcher, shouldn’t he be held
accountable for his own mistakes? This has always seemed illogical to
me, but then again so has the idea of playing three innings and then
watching them disappear from the record books, like on Opening Day."
I thought this was an interesting question and wanted to get everyone's insight and opinions on the matter. Below is Derrick Goold's response.
"Sort of bugs me, too. Just the wild pitch and passed balls rulings
that really make a minimal difference in an ERA. Some seem like a real
fine line between pitcher’s fault and catcher’s fault. But then I got
to thinking about it for this question.
Just a few weeks ago in Houston this came into play. Randy Flores has
a 0.00 ERA so far this season because of his own fielding error. The
the Astro who scored on him was on second base because Flores flubbed a
grounder. Doesn’t seen right at first look, but it does seem simple. It
also seems logical. When it comes to parceling out earned runs it
probably balances out over the course of a season. But, most
importantly, by cutting out even runs scored on a pitcher’s error it
allows for a pitcher’s ERA to more truly reflect the quality of his
pitching and not his pitching and fielding. And we all know pitchers
who benefit from quality defense (Jeff Suppan, Cardinal) and ones who haven’t (Jeff Suppan, Brewer)."
Another interesting tidbit I read the other day was in regards to counting walks in a players batting line. For instance, say Albert Pujols goes 1 for 2 in a game with 3 walks.....instead of saying he only went 1 for 2 you would say that he went 4 for 5 since he was on base 4 times. It would wreak havoc with the stats, but would make it easier to see Pujols' true contribution to the game. I for one would be against this as it would cause more confusion. It would only reward lazy people who don't or can't read a box score correctly. Just thought it was an interesting insight.
Leave a comment
|
|
|
3 Comments
|
|
|
2008 Cubs Preview
The pitcher is no longer a pitcher once he lets go of the ball. When he lets go of the ball he becomes a fielder, thus the fielding error.
As for the 'adding walks to make it 4/5'....that's what ob% is for. 1 for 2 means he got one hit in two at-bats. Walks don't count for at bats. There are box scores that track Total Plate Appearance (TPA) and that's where the 5 appearances would register.
I have to agree with Jack. A pitcher is responsible to field his position, but if he makes an error to allow a run it is a "fielding error" not a "pitching error" as it were. Therefor it should not count against his "pitching statistics", just his "fielding statistics". Pitchers do get graded for that and they do give out a Gold Glove to pitchers. IF they allowed fielding errors to count against pitching statistics then they would allow the opposite, and the pitcher with the lowest era in the league would always win the Gold Glove for every position. Now that, is stoner logic.
I agree. Nitpicking like that would open up a can of worms. If you first allowed a separation like that to occur, then pitchers would argue for something ludicrous to balance it out. Imagine Curt Schilling arguing to the rules committee for homeruns given up on hanging curveballs/sliders to be "unearned" because it was an "erroneous" pitch. Pitchers don't intend to leave a breaking pitch hanging up there to be crushed, but it happens. I know I'm stretching things a bit, but there are so many stats in baseball that it would be crazy to draw sketchy lines for rare situations like a pitcher's fielding error.