Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sunnyside

ERA Rule Change for Inherited Runners

27 posts in this topic

As it stands, reliever ERA is meaningless. There is an Inherited Runner/Strand stat, but that does not pop up as a primary stat, and it also does not measure the situation a reliever inherits runners on base.

A simple way to make relievers more accountable would be the following: Runners on with 2 outs: all runners charged to reliever; Runners on with 1 out: the runner on third is charged to the starter, the runner on second is split, the runner on first is split; Runners on with none out; the runners on third and second are on the starter, the runner on first is split.

So if a guys comes in with one out and runners on first and second in the 7th and allows both runners to score, he would be charged 1 and a half runs (not the zero he is charged now); a starter would be charged a half run (not the two as under current rules).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charged with half runs? Not going to happen. I do hate middle relievers that come in to make sure the starters runs score but then get out of it before anything is charged to them. Its just one of those things that you cant change though. The common fan or fantasy guy may not look at inherited runners scoring but when these contracts get drawn up and GMs evaluate free agents I'm sure it gets looked at plenty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This totally ****** up my Shelby Miller start tonight. ERA can be a stupid stat, indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think 1/2 runs will drive too many batty, at least in regards to a reliever: ! and a half runs in 2/3's would be an ERA of 22.25.

For a starter, the 1/3 and 2/3 innings already make odd #'s. For example, let's say a starter goes 7 and a third, allowing two runs, and leaving with men on first and second and one out in the eight. A reliever comes on and allows both runs to score - both charged to the starter and nothing to the reliever. Instead of 4 runs in 7 and a third (4.91 ERA) to the starter, as under current rules, it would be 2 and a half runs in 7 and a third (3.07). I think most fans, real and fantasy, would say 3.07 is much closer as an indicator to the starter's performance than 4.91.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a starter gives up a single and a ground-rule double. Still no outs. It's second and third now. RP comes in and gives up a single that scores two. Then proceeds to strike out the side. They each get charged with a run. How is that fair to the RP?

Begging the question: Why am I wasting my time on this?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands, reliever ERA is meaningless. There is an Inherited Runner/Strand stat, but that does not pop up as a primary stat, and it also does not measure the situation a reliever inherits runners on base.

A simple way to make relievers more accountable would be the following: Runners on with 2 outs: all runners charged to reliever; Runners on with 1 out: the runner on third is charged to the starter, the runner on second is split, the runner on first is split; Runners on with none out; the runners on third and second are on the starter, the runner on first is split.

So if a guys comes in with one out and runners on first and second in the 7th and allows both runners to score, he would be charged 1 and a half runs (not the zero he is charged now); a starter would be charged a half run (not the two as under current rules).

Congrats Bud Selig you are now off the hook for worst idea of all time, for your ridiculous Allstar game determines Homefield idea.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands, reliever ERA is meaningless. There is an Inherited Runner/Strand stat, but that does not pop up as a primary stat, and it also does not measure the situation a reliever inherits runners on base.

A simple way to make relievers more accountable would be the following: Runners on with 2 outs: all runners charged to reliever; Runners on with 1 out: the runner on third is charged to the starter, the runner on second is split, the runner on first is split; Runners on with none out; the runners on third and second are on the starter, the runner on first is split.

So if a guys comes in with one out and runners on first and second in the 7th and allows both runners to score, he would be charged 1 and a half runs (not the zero he is charged now); a starter would be charged a half run (not the two as under current rules).

or you could just go with a stat that makes sense like FIP or SIERA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands, reliever ERA is meaningless. There is an Inherited Runner/Strand stat, but that does not pop up as a primary stat, and it also does not measure the situation a reliever inherits runners on base.

A simple way to make relievers more accountable would be the following: Runners on with 2 outs: all runners charged to reliever; Runners on with 1 out: the runner on third is charged to the starter, the runner on second is split, the runner on first is split; Runners on with none out; the runners on third and second are on the starter, the runner on first is split.

So if a guys comes in with one out and runners on first and second in the 7th and allows both runners to score, he would be charged 1 and a half runs (not the zero he is charged now); a starter would be charged a half run (not the two as under current rules).

Relievers don't need to be "more" accountable for runners put on base by a starter, regardless of the number of outs. They shouldn't be accountable at all. The reliever is put in a situation a starter is never put in - coming into a game with runners already on base. The reliever is cleaning up the starters mess, the starter is the one that needs to be held accountable, so this change would do the opposite of what it's intending. This isn't an actual issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a good laugh. This is one downside to fantasy baseball... people wanting to change baseball rules cuz existing rules hurt their make-belive team sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see something like this happen (maybe not exactly, but similar). Not for fantasy value, but for real life value. At the very least, it would show the Phillies just how god-awful Antonio Bastardo really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize this will contribute nothing to this thread but this question needs to be asked. Why is this even a real topic???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is absolutely ridiculous. why would we charge earned runs to a reliever who had nothing to do with allowing those runners to get on base? is this real? ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a starter gives up a single and a ground-rule double. Still no outs. It's second and third now. RP comes in and gives up a single that scores two. Then proceeds to strike out the side. They each get charged with a run. How is that fair to the RP?

Begging the question: Why am I wasting my time on this?

Both runs get charged to starter since run scorers were both inherited?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be all for changing it to charge them all to the person who actually allows them. Starters get hosed all too often. If the manager opts to make the reliever responsible then he should be statistically responsible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No outs, the runs would be charged to the starter. One out, the runner on second would be split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a starter gives up a single and a ground-rule double. Still no outs. It's second and third now. RP comes in and gives up a single that scores two. Then proceeds to strike out the side. They each get charged with a run. How is that fair to the RP?

Begging the question: Why am I wasting my time on this?

The only reason that we think that's reasonable is because it's how it has always been. If a pitcher relieves another pitcher, it's a change in responsibility. His job is to prevent that run from scoring. He failed at that job.

I'm sure in nearly every case the starter would be fine to stay in the game and finish the mess he starts, but isn't given that chance by the manager. So how is it fair that some scrub comes in, gives them all up, and affects the ace's stats, and secondarily, his chances at a contract and his future livelihood?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, there are other stats out there, but they're not in common use. This is an easy way to make ERA relevant for all pitchers. Just read this morning in the blurbs about the ERA's of Wright, Neshek, and Lindstrom. Those ERA #'s would be more meaningful if there was a rule such as the one above.

Some of you said the current rules are fine, which makes no sense at all. If 3 runs score on a combination of 4 hits, doesn't it make sense to make the pitcher who gave up 2 of those hits partially responsible?

Bud Selig is an awful commissioner, and isn't bright enough to propose something like this.

If you can't get your head around the topic, just don't reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a starter gives up a single and a ground-rule double. Still no outs. It's second and third now. RP comes in and gives up a single that scores two. Then proceeds to strike out the side. They each get charged with a run. How is that fair to the RP?

Begging the question: Why am I wasting my time on this?

The only reason that we think that's reasonable is because it's how it has always been. If a pitcher relieves another pitcher, it's a change in responsibility. His job is to prevent that run from scoring. He failed at that job.

I'm sure in nearly every case the starter would be fine to stay in the game and finish the mess he starts, but isn't given that chance by the manager. So how is it fair that some scrub comes in, gives them all up, and affects the ace's stats, and secondarily, his chances at a contract and his future livelihood?

good SPs generally get to finish what they started. A. if your managers is yanking you with 2 runners on and 1 or 2 outs, it's b/c you probably haven't earned that right to try and get out of the mess. B. if you are approaching a high pitch count and you know your manager will give you the hook if you allow a runner or two on, guess what? don't allow the runners to get on and you won't have to encounter the situation.

you can't always push the blame away. that is what losers do. the SP got himself in that mess, so unfortunately the possible consequences are a relief pitcher will come in and allow those runners to affect your ERA. you don't like that? do something about it to prevent the possibility..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in order to prevent losers from shifting responsibility, you're letting the reliever that actually blew the game to shift 100% of the responsibility. That's very logically consistent (sarcasm font).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in order to prevent losers from shifting responsibility, you're letting the reliever that actually blew the game to shift 100% of the responsibility. That's very logically consistent (sarcasm font).

guess you've never heard of a strand rate. sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a prime example of over thinking a non issue. As stated before, use FIP or SIERA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a good laugh. This is one downside to fantasy baseball... people wanting to change baseball rules cuz existing rules hurt their make-belive team sometimes.

Actually, I first thought of this rule change and other changes about 20 years ago, long before I started fantasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like others have said, non issue in real baseball.

I think, as cyberer pointed out, it's definitely an issue in real baseball. When negotiating a contract, a SP can't say, "but check my SIERA & FIP!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like others have said, non issue in real baseball.

I think, as cyberer pointed out, it's definitely an issue in real baseball. When negotiating a contract, a SP can't say, "but check my SIERA & FIP!"

why not? you think advanced sabermetrics are for the fans or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.