Quote:
Originally Posted by bravos4evr
wins are a pretty worthless stat for judging individual production and yes his ERA is low, but his FIP is near 3 and for his era, it's good but not HOF worthy.
This is one of the examples of how old time "baseball card" stats really don't tell us how good a player is . His number look average once you get below the surface. 27.3 WAR over 15 years isn't much more than that, even if you say it was 50% low against him that would only make him a 40 WAR player, and over that career, once again, pretty avg.
ETA: during his career (1905-1917) Reulbach was 16th among starters in WAR, 27th in ERA and way down in the 150's in FIP. (we are talking an era, where the highest ERA among qualified starters (from 05-17) was 4.02!!!)
|
FIP is pretty worthless for deadball pitchers. You might as well say he didn't strike out a lot of batters and there are better stats for that. The pitcher that wins the game is the one who allows the fewest runs. Reulbach had an ERA+ of 123. That is better than many pitchers in the HOF including 300 game winner Eddie Plank. That is 9th among deadball pitchers post 1901. Wins and winning percentage mean a lot for this time period when pichers often pitched the whole game. There are certainly worse pitchers in the HOF. That doesn't mean he deserves it, but for this topic, he is one of the best not in.