Brewers 3, Cardinals 2

then Braddock can share the closer’s spot with him

except for pitchers probably need about 5-6 seasons of play before they get enough fielding opportunities for WAR to be stable for defensive purposes. but yeah, I could get behind just going with an all-inclusive WAR stat (incl. batting, as you point out).

come up with a translation system that converts xFIP or any other D.I.P. into a 0-10 scale, called the Pitching-Good-O-Meter. No need to worry about how it’s calculated, just another stat they can randomly toss around to pretend they know what’s going on.

See: ERA, current rule.

mental error on my part. That wasn’t an error in the books, but if an error had occurred at that point, which you realized.

I’m not sure what you are getting at. If you mean the batter hit a double and scored on the play because of an error, the pitcher could have struck out the batter and then it is not an issue. Or to zoom out even more, he could (should) have gotten the batter to hit it at someone. Either way, it is his fault for allowing the batter to put it in play safely.

After all, that is the point here, no? As I understand it, PagsBrewCrew wants pitchers to be responsible for all runs scored on their watch, unless they are the result of a fielder’s mistake. However, if that mistake prolongs an inning, pitchers are on their own except for the players currently at bat or on base. That undermines the point of excluding runs scoring as a result of a fielder’s mistake. After all, the pitcher would not face subsequent batters in that inning if not for that fielder’s mistake. If those subsequent runs are earned, why not the runs that scored on the error(s)?

I think this stems from finding flaws and distortions that aren’t there by using the rule incorrectly. The point is not to project what would happen in future innings or excuse the pitcher for giving up a home run, it is to reconstruct the inning as if there were no errors. If there were no mistakes, then batters that scored after the inning should have ended would never have had the opportunity to score in that inning. What happens in past innings has no impact on the earned/unearned run calculation for that inning or for future innings. Likewise, deciding whether or not to rule a run earned or unearned does not involve how long a pitcher sits between innings, pitch count, or how strong the wind is. You can’t control what excuses people will make for a pitcher or how they use statistics, but claiming the calculation of earned runs is a slippery slope that excuses pitchers for pitch count, etc., ignores the actual rule.

If PagsBrewCrew wants a simple stat for fans to discuss a pitcher’s results and doesn’t want to use the earned run rule because it excludes too many batters, he should use runs allowed per nine innings. Neutering the earned run rule so it only applies to the batter and those already on base when the error occurs has no fewer “flaws” than the current rule.