Rays (Jax) vs Blue Jays (Cease): 5/13/26, 7:07pm

[G-Snarls]

2 hours ago, Governator said:

It's technically not even the rule, it's just the scorer giving it to them every time regardless.

Win (W)

Definition

A pitcher receives a win when he is the pitcher of record when his team takes the lead for good -- with a couple rare exceptions. First, a starting pitcher must pitch at least five innings (in a traditional game of nine innings or longer) to qualify for the win. If he does not, the official scorer awards the win to the most effective relief pitcher.

https://www.mlb.com/glossary/standard-stats/win
 

When has that ever happened?  LOL

Right?

Hoffman was certainly not the "most effective relief pitcher" for the winning team last night 

[Olerud363.354]

31 minutes ago, G-Snarls said:

Right?

Hoffman was certainly not the "most effective relief pitcher" for the winning team last night 

If I read the rule right they don't have the option to take it away from him if he is the last pitcher.

Scenario

6th inning 4-1 Jays

Hoffman comes in with 2 outs gives up 7 runs in an inning.   8-4

Bottom 6th Grand SLam Adres Giminez, Grand Slam Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Grand Slam Andres Giminez  Record 3 grand slams in inning.  Record tying 2 grand slams (Fernando Tatis Sr. vs Dodgers many years ago) by Giminez.  16-8 Jays.

Yariel Rodreques comes in.  3 inning 9ks.  Scorer can give Yariel win.

But.  Last night could not give a different reliever.  It has to be after the lead change. 

[jaysblue]

2 hours ago, Brownie19 said:

Just remove pitching wins and loses altogether.  They have always been stupid and unnecessary.  Should Varsho get a "win" because he hit the walk off HR last night?  No - no he should not.  

Teams get wins and loses, players do not.  They should remove them from goalie stats in hockey as well.

I get the argument, and pitcher wins are definitely flawed, but I wouldn’t erase them completely.

They’re not a great measure of how good a pitcher is - way too much luck involved. A guy can go 5 innings, give up 4 runs, and still get a win because the bats go off and the bullpen holds it. Or a reliever comes in at the right time, throws an inning and gets a win added to his stats. Meanwhile another guy can throw 7 shutout innings and get nothing because his team forgets how to hit.

But wins can still tell part of the story, especially now when starters going deep into games is becoming a rarity. If a starter piles up wins, it usually means he’s at least giving his team length and keeping them in games often enough to qualify for those decisions.

So yeah, agree that we shouldn't use wins to decide who the best pitcher is. That’s outdated and for the most part majority of people around the game agree. But as a historical/context stat? I still think there’s some value there. Just don’t treat it like it’s ERA, FIP, K/9, WAR, or anything close to that.
 

[jaysblue]

2 hours ago, Governator said:

Yea the W is so dumb, just see King Felix. It's why we have WAR anyway.

Yeah I think King Felix's 2010 season was the turning point, where we started to see a change in how the baseball world views a pitchers W-L record. It's no longer significant when it comes to determining who the best pitchers are, or when it comes to player contracts or awards. 

[max silver]

1 minute ago, jaysblue said:

I get the argument, and pitcher wins are definitely flawed, but I wouldn’t erase them completely.

They’re not a great measure of how good a pitcher is - way too much luck involved. A guy can go 5 innings, give up 4 runs, and still get a win because the bats go off and the bullpen holds it. Or a reliever comes in at the right time, throws an inning and gets a win added to his stats. Meanwhile another guy can throw 7 shutout innings and get nothing because his team forgets how to hit.

But wins can still tell part of the story, especially now when starters going deep into games is becoming a rarity. If a starter piles up wins, it usually means he’s at least giving his team length and keeping them in games often enough to qualify for those decisions.

So yeah, agree that we shouldn't use wins to decide who the best pitcher is. That’s outdated and for the most part majority of people around the game agree. But as a historical/context stat? I still think there’s some value there. Just don’t treat it like it’s ERA, FIP, K/9, WAR, or anything close to that.
 

I'm at the point where I would completely eliminate the concept of pitcher wins as there's far too much that's completely out of the pitcher's control. Great pitchers on bad teams often don't accumulate many wins due to factors such as lack of run support/bad defense etc., and crappy pitchers on good teams can pile up wins by simply pitching 5 innings at a time despite pitching very poorly. Using a win as a barometer of literally anything other than a team victory is something that should be let out to pasture. 

[jaysblue]

3 minutes ago, max silver said:

I'm at the point where I would completely eliminate the concept of pitcher wins as there's far too much that's completely out of the pitcher's control. Great pitchers on bad teams often don't accumulate many wins due to factors such as lack of run support/bad defense etc., and crappy pitchers on good teams can pile up wins by simply pitching 5 innings at a time despite pitching very poorly. Using a win as a barometer of literally anything other than a team victory is something that should be let out to pasture. 

I honestly don’t disagree. Pitcher wins are pretty meaningless as an evaluation tool because there’s just way too much outside the pitcher’s control.

So yeah, as a serious barometer of pitcher quality, wins are basically useless now. The only reason I don’t think MLB will ever fully erase them is because historians probably still value the continuity of the stat. It’s been tracked forever, it connects eras, and it’s part of the old baseball record-keeping language.

But in terms of actually judging who pitched well? Yeah, that ship has sailed.

[max silver]

6 minutes ago, jaysblue said:

I honestly don’t disagree. Pitcher wins are pretty meaningless as an evaluation tool because there’s just way too much outside the pitcher’s control.

So yeah, as a serious barometer of pitcher quality, wins are basically useless now. The only reason I don’t think MLB will ever fully erase them is because historians probably still value the continuity of the stat. It’s been tracked forever, it connects eras, and it’s part of the old baseball record-keeping language.

But in terms of actually judging who pitched well? Yeah, that ship has sailed.

Yeah I could see that argument for historical purposes. Wins are slowly becoming irrelevant in terms of hall of fame voting and will become less and less important over time so we shall see how the statistic eventually evolves to reflect the changing landscape. 

[G-Snarls]

25 minutes ago, jaysblue said:

I get the argument, and pitcher wins are definitely flawed, but I wouldn’t erase them completely.

They’re not a great measure of how good a pitcher is - way too much luck involved. A guy can go 5 innings, give up 4 runs, and still get a win because the bats go off and the bullpen holds it. Or a reliever comes in at the right time, throws an inning and gets a win added to his stats. Meanwhile another guy can throw 7 shutout innings and get nothing because his team forgets how to hit.

But wins can still tell part of the story, especially now when starters going deep into games is becoming a rarity. If a starter piles up wins, it usually means he’s at least giving his team length and keeping them in games often enough to qualify for those decisions.

So yeah, agree that we shouldn't use wins to decide who the best pitcher is. That’s outdated and for the most part majority of people around the game agree. But as a historical/context stat? I still think there’s some value there. Just don’t treat it like it’s ERA, FIP, K/9, WAR, or anything close to that.
 

Agreed 

I don't want to get rid of the win-loss stats for pitchers either.  I just take them with a grain of salt.

Educated baseball fans understand what it means and it's limitations 

[Brownie19]

24 minutes ago, jaysblue said:

I honestly don’t disagree. Pitcher wins are pretty meaningless as an evaluation tool because there’s just way too much outside the pitcher’s control.

So yeah, as a serious barometer of pitcher quality, wins are basically useless now. The only reason I don’t think MLB will ever fully erase them is because historians probably still value the continuity of the stat. It’s been tracked forever, it connects eras, and it’s part of the old baseball record-keeping language.

But in terms of actually judging who pitched well? Yeah, that ship has sailed.

They are only there for historic reasons and to avoid the backlash from old and casual fans.  That's the reason.  It rarely, if ever, tell us anything about performance for all the reasons you pointed out.

I can hear people now saying they can't watch baseball anymore because they've completely changed the game and blah, blah, blah.  Same idiots who complained when they took away takeout slides and implemented the pitch counts.

I love baseball stats a lot more than most - but they should just scrap it altogether.  It's worse to carry on with a known mistake simply because you don't want to upset the apple cart.  

[jaysblue]

2 hours ago, Laika said:

Just assign the W to the pitcher with the highest WPA in the game, on the team that won. Same for the L. 

Also, add a new stat - hitter wins and losses.

Basically just translates WPA, a stupid nerd stat that only f***ing nerds care about, into a classic man stat with hair on its chest that any steak eating American can wrap their tough head around. 

Wins last night: Varsho, Cease
Losses: Brooks, Simpson

flawless stat 

Shocked we haven't scrapped the pitchers W category across fantasy baseball. 

[Spanky__99]

3 hours ago, Laika said:

Just assign the W to the pitcher with the highest WPA in the game, on the team that won. Same for the L. 

Also, add a new stat - hitter wins and losses.

Basically just translates WPA, a stupid nerd stat that only f***ing nerds care about, into a classic man stat with hair on its chest that any steak eating American can wrap their tough head around. 

Wins last night: Varsho, Cease
Losses: Brooks, Simpson

flawless stat 

Gold man, lmao

[Spanky__99]

Is there a parrot in here? 🤔😅🤪

[G-Snarls]

2 hours ago, jaysblue said:

Shocked we haven't scrapped the pitchers W category across fantasy baseball. 

Really though..  How much is the WL record  usually weighted?  Hopefully not much. 

Pretty big deal for those great pitchers on bad teams or vice versa. 

Must make a difference in your draft order if you're considering two similarly good pitchers but one's on a good team and one's on a bad one. 

A guy like Paul Skenes is incredible but can barely scrape together 10 wins in a season

Meanwhile Taijuan Walker goes 15-6 a few years back riding the Phillies offense

[G-Snarls]

Rays Designate Aaron Brooks For Assignment