The importance of ERA

[honestiago1]

While I still believe WHIP must be the #1 factor in choosing pitchers, I have started to pay more attention to ERA, especially among those pitchers who always seem tp put men on and get out of jams. I had good luck with a bad Sisk card, went ahead and drafted him again, and now seem to have a genuine good Sisk card. I've also used Sammy Stewart (albeit limited duty), and he seems to be effective (at present).

What this tells me (possibly), is that SOME high-WHIP guys can be quite effective. Sisk is going to be around 1.40 most years, BUT it's all singles and walks. Thus, it takes a lot to get around the basepaths. Granted, he needs to come in bases empty to be extremely effective, but, in some ways, he like a Quiz with the walks and singles exchanged. Sammy Stewart is similar, as is Jim Kern (though Kern has the K's).

Bottom line: I no longer automatically overlook pitchers with 1.40 and above WHIPS. I check out the ERA's (as well as the cards themselves). The cards seem to reflect the stingy ERAs (though, to be honest, a pitcher's ERA could be the result of good pen, ballpark, as well).

[Jablowmi]

Honestiago, I think ERA is important in that it often reflects the number of total bases a pitcher allows. In other words, if a pitcher gives up a few hits/walks, but a larger than normal % were 2Bs and HRs, this fact is likely reflected in ERA. When short-cutting the review of a card (rather than counting total bases), I often compare both WHIP and ERA.

[nycalderon]

I think there are plenty of higher whip guys in the 80s who make good options... walks are bad but doubles and hrs are worse...

[bjs73]

Your assesment is correct. There are some gems to be had that don't show up on the WHIP search.

[honestiago1]

I can always use draft advive. I was thinking that Krukow can be effective, and he tends to be higher on the WHIP on many cards. Has anybody ever had any luck with LaCoss? I can remember using him in face-to-face from time to time.

jablowmi is more accurate than I am, of course, in assessing extra base hit potential, although I have to say that lower WHIP pitchers tend to have a XBH's on their cards and fewer singles, right? Those sinkerballers can be good, though I haven't id'ed all of 'em. I recently discovered Jim Beattie, who I believe really has four usable years. Langston's price is high for his WHIP, but his cards are pretty good. Why is Matt Young so pricey, anyway? (I ask this, b/c I was thinking SEA pitchers should be lower priced, and if moved into pitcher's park would do much better).

[TomP]

There [i:45b5ae24c9]could [/i:45b5ae24c9] be another factor. The CD game has a clutch pitching option. I have not heard if this feature is turned on in the TSN version.

[canauscot]

The link between WHIP and ERA is not at all apparent in a current example of mine. I'm using Flanagan (only know for sure it's not his best year) in Fenway (not exactly a great environment for a typical Lefty) as shown by;
G: 22 IP: 131.2 WHIP: [b:6b8f7633d4]1.52[/b:6b8f7633d4]
but in a league with an overall ERA of 4.90 and with my Offense ranked 8th he's still
W: 10 L: 4 ERA: [b:6b8f7633d4]3.35[/b:6b8f7633d4]

A good bullpen is certainly helping I'm sure, but the guy is 3rd in the league in ERA to a top flight closer and a pre-Crack Gooden!

[Outta Leftfield]

How many HR has Flanagan given up? High WHIP // Low ERA is usually a tipoff that a pitcher isn't giving up many HR per IP.

Of course, he might be just plain lucky....

[canauscot]

...Make that 10-5 with a 3.50 ERA. Still not a terrible outing given the competition, but he just gave up his 19th, 20th and 21st in 7.1 taking IP up to 139 with a WHIP of 1.53

[honestiago1]

Cards of pitchers with subtantially low ERA's and conversely related WHIPS (SISK and his 2.00 ERA's and 1.40 WHIPS), seem to be strategically engineered to get out of jams. 'Course, Sisk is a walk/singles pitcher, and it takes several of either to mount a rally. That could be the reason he and his ilk can be effective despite high WHIPS.

Flanagan isn't the same type of pitcher as Sisk. His cards aren't all high-WHIP, and he does have some gopher cards. I was just commenting, really, though, on how I usually passed over 1.40 or more pitchers automatically, when some of them can be effective with high WHIPS. They just get out of jams.