Saturday, January 15, 2022
Of Johan and Carpenter
Using Enhanced Game Score: Johan Santana had 1 game at 100+ points, and 10 at 90-99. So did Chris Carpenter.
Johan had 31 at 80-89, Carpenter had 30.
Johan had 171 at 50-79, Carpenter had 170.
In other words, when they were both above average, they reached those heights as often as the other player.
Johan had 76 games below average, while Carpenter had 139. And that is the difference between the two players. It's not that Johan was better necessarily. It was that he had fewer bad games, while having the same number of good games.
So, let me ask you this question: when you think of someone achieving Hall of Fame status, do you think of how good they are when they are on? Or do you also think how often they haven't been good?
If you were to award "Hall of Fame" points, on a start by start basis, can someone lose HOF points for a bad start? Or, do you just focus on the good starts?
Which makes more sense to you:
- Give 5 points for a 100 Game Score start, 4 for a 90, 3 for an 80... 0 for a 50 ... minus 1 for a 40, minus 2 for a 30...minus 5 for a 0 Game Score start
- Give 5 points for a 100 Game Score start, 4 for a 90, 3 for an 80... 0 for a 50... and 0 for every start below that
How you answer this question will tell you whether you see Carpenter around the equal of Johan, or much below him.