From: mab50312@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark A. Blickhan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Eckersley NOT better than Fingers
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:52:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr14.205226.17091
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Hairless Primate Huckabay) writes:

>glb50263@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Gary L. Blickhan) writes:
>>Simply put, Eckersley is not better than Rollie Fingers.

>Simply put, your analysis is juvenile.

>>1)Fingers is already in the Hall of Fame.  A Sporting News poll of baseball
Maybe a baseball writer should analyze it, but since you posted, you
are an amateur baseball writer ("who don't know squat").

>>writers concluded that Eckersley's chances are about "even money."

>Bob Welch won the CY in 1990.  Bell and Dawson won MVP in 1987.  Cecil
>Fielder finished second in AL MVP voting last year.  LaMarr Hoyt.
>Pete Vuckovich.  Baseball writers have proven, beyond a shadow of a 
>doubt, that they don't know squat.


Anyway, this is just obvious argument ad hominem. They put people into
the HOF whether they know anything (by your standards, which are....???).

>> (stuff deleted)

>Again, you're paying attention to sportswriters.  Bad move.  Many of
>them think the earth is flat.  Or that RBIs have meaning.

Tell me, does how many times the pitcher spits on the mound worth anything?

>>3)Fingers led the majors in saves three times (1977,1978,1981).  Eckersley
>>has only done that once.

>True enough.  Saves are also a meaningless statistic.  I'm not trying to
>attack Fingers.  Disprove my statement.  My statement was that over the
>five year period, 1987-1991, Dennis Eckersley had the best five year run
>ever by a reliever, particularly when era adjusted.  Jonathan King posted
>the relevant numbers for Eckersley.  Now, go find a five-year span of
>Fingers' pitching that's better.  Then I'll concede the point.

Ok, you think saves are meaningless (I do not agree). Then what is meaning-
ful? You mention **era adjusted**. HOW?? Basing an adjustment of era on
(I don't know, moustache length??) anything is ridiculous!  ERA IS an
adjustment!!! It adjusts for inherited runners, errors, etc. There is 
no consensus about ballpark adjustments (runners scored in Wrigley are only
worth 89.472563467938646% of runners that score in the Astrodome?).

If the Eck HAD to pitch for the Cubs, he is totally responsible for 
signing the contract. (On the other hand, are Ryno's homers worth any less?)

>>4)Fingers has the all-time record for saves. (341)   Eckersley had 188 at
>>the end of 1991.

>Yep.  And Eckersley spent more than half his career as a starting pitcher.
>If Eck had started as a reliever, how do you think the numbers would stack
>up?

If ***  I  *** had played baseball, I would have hit 500 homers (maybe?)
Definitely not likely, but WHO IS TO SAY???  

DO NOT SPECULATE!!! The Eck was a mediocre starter until 1988.

>>5)In three World Series apiece, Eckersley did hardly anything.
>>1988- 0 wins, 1 loss, 10.8 ERA.  He was the goat.
>>1989- 1 save in 1 2/3 innings. 0 ERA.  Pretty good.
>>1990- 0 wins, 1 loss, 6.75 ERA.  0 Saves.  Not good.

>So you're talking about what, five or ten innings?

Only 5 or 10 innings? Why the Eck only pitched about 60 in 1989.
Anybody knows that World Series innings are more important than those
that you pitch against the cellar dweller after you clinch!
Remember Don Larsen's WS perfect game. It was only 9 innings!

>> Fingers was great.  
>> 1972- 1 win, 1 loss, 2 saves, 11 k's, 1.74 ERA.
>> 1973- 0 wins, 1 loss, 2 saves, 8 k's, 0.66 ERA.
>> 1974- 1 win, 0 losses, 2 saves, 6 k's, 1.93 ERA.

>Looks like 6 saves, 2 blown saves.  Not terribly impressive to me.



Wrong.  One of those losses was in the 12th after he came in the 10th.
Anyway, the Eck wouldn't want to throw more than a few pitches.

>> 6) Fingers has a 2.90 ERA compared to the 3.47 ERA of Eckersley.


>How about comparing Eckersley's RELIEF era to Fingers'?  Show us
>some RELEVANT numbers.

ERA is relevant as it is. Don't doctor it up. 
By the way, Fingers used to get his saves by pitching more than one
inning (how else can you get the league MVP?) while Tony LaRussa has
made it clear that the Eck (until last year when they had no one else)
would only pitch in OPTIMAL save situations, no more, no less.

Using his special side-arm delivery, the Eck merely hides 
himself from the league. If he pitches 80 innings (300 batters,about),
he doesn't face the same batter in the same game more than once(unlike
starters), or not even in the same year.  If the Eck is as good as
you say, why does he pitch so little?   Maybe, he'll go back to his
old form if he strains himself.

>> (stuff deleted)
> (stuff deleted)

Go California Angels!   Alvin Davis for AL batting champ(maybe)!

Mark Blickhan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball