Keeping Score: One Game Says Little About Strasburg – Bats Blog – NYTimes.com
Posted by Andy on June 11, 2010
Keeping Score: One Game Says Little About Strasburg – Bats Blog – NYTimes.com
I got a chance to fill in for Sean this week on his New York Times column.
I showed a couple of different statistical takes on Stephen Strasburg's first start--one that makes him look like the next Randy Johnson and one that makes him look like the next Jeff Pico.
Keep an eye on the NYTimes blog as you'll see another familiar name next week and you can continue reading Sean's work as the season goes on. These columns are also available in the print edition of the Times on Fridays.
June 11th, 2010 at 9:27 am
Here's a list of pitchers in the database who've had games with 14+ strikeouts and 0 walks. Interesting list.
June 11th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Studying Myandermast's list seems to justify my hopes that "the Debut" {caps intended} might just be one of those once-a-lifetime memories, like Big Train Johnson's
June 11th, 2010 at 5:59 pm
I think your article is good, but you reason for saying Strasburg may be a bust is heinous. It's fine to say that Strasburg may not live up to the expectations that have only grown since his debut. It seems in Nats fans' minds, of which I am one, anything short of 10 Cy Youngs is inexcusable. But you say that because he got a high Game Score in his debut he is in the company of pitchers that busted out after that. I feel like that is a pretty bad way to look at that stat. That would be like saying that every player who hits 5 HRs in his first game or steals 4 bases didn't become a HOFer. Its too small a group, and you can't really ever say early success is a sign of future failure. I liked the article, but disagreed with the reasoning for why he may bust.
June 11th, 2010 at 7:28 pm
That's not the conclusion I attempted to draw. I was only trying to remind people of past occasions when there was a lot of hype over other first-game performances that ended in disappointment. Thus, a first game gem isn't a guarantee. Frankly, the article was not aimed at the crowd that frequents THIS blog, so you might be overlooking the simplicity of my point.
June 12th, 2010 at 10:29 am
Okay, I understand your point now. I knew you were better than to draw the conclusion that early success is an indicator of future failure, that's why when I thought you were saying that I was surprised it came from one of the authors of this blog. Thanks for clearing that up, I was surprised at first, but now I get where you are coming from.
June 12th, 2010 at 10:37 am
I think the article is pretty clear, but certainly plenty of readers heard the same message as you originally did. Clearly I have a lot to learn about writing for a general audience like the New York Times readers. I can't be nearly as casual as I can here, especially since I can always go back and clarify things on this blog.