NFBC Message Boards

I'm new to and intrigued by the Pure Quality Start (PQS) approach to analyzing pitchers, but sometimes it produces a very different result than the fantasy stat line. For example, in this afternoon's game, Ted Lilly had a pitching line of:



6IP, 6H, 5ER, 3BB, 6K, 1 HR



which (if I understand it correctly) is worth a perfect PQS score of 5. However, in fantasy terms, his numbers are:



0 Win, 7.5 ERA, 1.5 WHIP, and 6 Ks



Can't say that I would have a warm fuzzy feeling if I were a Lilly owner today.



Thoughts??

The scary thing for Ted Lilly owners, including me, is that this was far and away the best outing he's had so far. He failed to make it through 5 innings in his first three starts. I benched him for today's mediocre stat line.



Kevin

Originally posted by Cowboy Joe:

I'm new to and intrigued by the Pure Quality Start (PQS) approach to analyzing pitchers, but sometimes it produces a very different result than the fantasy stat line. For example, in this afternoon's game, Ted Lilly had a pitching line of:



6IP, 6H, 5ER, 3BB, 6K, 1 HR



which (if I understand it correctly) is worth a perfect PQS score of 5. However, in fantasy terms, his numbers are:



0 Win, 7.5 ERA, 1.5 WHIP, and 6 Ks



Can't say that I would have a warm fuzzy feeling if I were a Lilly owner today.



Thoughts?? It's exactly at the outer bounds of that system. You wouldn't have too many like this. Still, if you knew he allowed three walks, six hits, and a homerun, you would expect some damage which puts the outer bounds too far. I'd keep the IP and K rate the same and then say the walk # should be at least 4 less than the number of innings pitched. Drop the hits column altogether.



The homerun thing is ridiculous because one in six innings equals a 1.5 HR/9 rate which is ridiculously high. Pitchers with those homerun rates over a season have ERAs over 5. I'd suggest for the pitcher to get a perfect score he needs either a) 0 HRs or b) at least 2/3 of his balls in play to be groundballs.



I'm not saying this is the best way, but it is certainly a system that requires revision.



[ April 17, 2008, 09:18 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

I'm a fan of PQS in determining pitchers to target for drafts and/or pickups via waiver wire. Only stat that i don't account for in my evaluation is the home run. i give a point to a pitcher if he allows 3 earned runs or less. If a pitcher allows 3 solo shots he scores a point; unlike, the real PQS scoring he loses this point.

Then again, a regular quality start produces a 6.00 ERA, which doesn't seem very...qualitative. I guess it is perfect if you'll settle for crappy quality starts.

Originally posted by bjoak:

Then again, a regular quality start produces a 6.00 ERA, which doesn't seem very...qualitative. I guess it is perfect if you'll settle for crappy quality starts. Minimum QS of 6IP and 3ER would be 4.50 not 6.00.

You are correct, sir. I was thinking it was 4 runs, displaying my ignorance of worthless, er, traditional baseball stats.

Originally posted by bjoak:

You are correct, sir. I was thinking it was 4 runs, displaying my ignorance of worthless, er, traditional baseball stats. I suspected it was just a slip of the tongue/spreadsheet.

I often find the PQS ratings are more helpful when referencing downside boundaries. Mainly looking at DIS % as a way to gauge risk and reliability. It seems to correspond to traditional fantasy scoring success slightly better than trying to project PQS DOM starts. By avoiding active DIS starts more than finding DOM starts you can better utilize the PQS ratings to your advantage in my opinion.



Especially noteworthy is young P who have trending downward DIS % while staying steady or growing DOM% (obviously). Ian Snell good example here.

Or the converse of that in older P. Greg Maddux is a good example. His progressively increasing DIS rate is a strong warning sign to me.



Just one man's spin on PQS, it's limitations and benefits.



Let Go Mets.