|
I brought up Felix to say I get where you're coming from and I understand it's not the be all and end all of pitching.
However, I do believe a win/loss record is indicative of good pitching. It's not the only indicator but certainly an indicator.
For instance, Happ pitched a game in Colorado, it started WAY late because of a rain delay, they were in Colorado and everything was just off. It became evident early that it was going to be a sloppy game with lots of runs scored. Cy Young himself could have pitched that game and gotten hit given the circumstances. Happ pitched 5 innings, gave up 5 runs and won the game because the Jays smashed the other pitcher. I thought Happ did really well given the circumstances of the start, he kept his team in the game against a hard fucking line up in shitty conditions in a bang box and he was better than the other guy.
Jack Morris was known for his situational pitching. If he was staked to a nice lead, he would just pitch strikes and give up scratch runs so he'd have a bit of a higher ERA but he'd still win 20 games... and hell the guy pitched 10 fucking innings in a world series game 7.
I think if you have a pitcher who by the end of his career has an astronomical win/loss record, (300 wins to maybe 150 losses or whatever) you can bet your bottom dollar he a) has won a Cy Young or 2 and b) is a hall of famer.
That doesn't mean a player who doesn't get as much run support as another guy because he played for lots of shitty offensive teams isn't better (As I have mentioned King Felix), but from what I've seen, good pitchers win ball games.
|