Is Using Wins + Quality Starts the Answer?
Rotograph’s venerable duo Mike Podhorzer and David Wiers recently contemplated aloud a new statistic, formulated by Ron Shandler, that replaces Wins (W) and Quality Starts (QS) by simply adding the two (W+QS). Chandler decided to use this approach in monthly fantasy leagues, and its useful to look at how using this combination could best be used to solve an implacable problem, the overall crappiness of using wins to evaluate a pitcher’s ability.
W+QS is interesting because it weights QS more than W, since a pitcher usually has considerably more QS than W. With a mean of 19 QS and only 12 W, a starting pitcher is more likely to throw at least six innings with 3 earned runs or less than he is to get the W. Wins are capricious and depend greatly on the pitcher’s offensive support. As a way to measure a pitcher’s ability, one might argue that wins are a waste of time. In fantasy baseball, a pitcher is most often valued by his ERA, WHIP, number of Ks and W and Saves. Some more progressive leagues use QS in place of the W.
As evidenced by the table below, ranking a pitcher by W+QS instead of wins alone certainly helps many a fine pitcher, especially James Shields, who leads the league in QS but only is ranked 38th in wins, while also penalizing others like Shelby Miller who has even more wins (14) than quality starts (12). Stephen Strasburg and Cole Hamels see the greatest percent increase jumping from wins to QS+W, while Jeremy Hellickson and Shelby Miller’s total changed the least.
Conversely, Shelby Miller and Jeff Locke saw the greatest increase from quality starts to W+QS, again showing that Mr. Miller, while pitching well his first full season, got the W more often that he made a quality start. A quick glance at his game log shows the innings-limited young pitcher often earned the win when pitching less than the 6 innings needed to record a quality start.
Comparing Wins, Quality Starts, and Wins + Quality Starts
Name |
W+QS Rank |
W Rank |
Change in Rank |
W |
QS |
W+QS |
% Change from W to W+QS |
% Change from QS to W+QS |
|
Max Scherzer |
1 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
24 |
44 |
120 |
83 |
|
Adam Wainwright |
2 |
3 |
1 |
18 |
26 |
44 |
144 |
69 |
|
Clayton Kershaw |
3 |
8 |
5 |
15 |
26 |
41 |
173 |
58 |
|
Jordan Zimmermann |
4 |
2 |
-2 |
19 |
21 |
40 |
111 |
90 |
|
C.J. Wilson |
5 |
5 |
0 |
17 |
23 |
40 |
135 |
74 |
|
Bartolo Colon |
6 |
4 |
-2 |
17 |
22 |
39 |
129 |
77 |
|
James Shields |
7 |
38 |
31 |
12 |
26 |
38 |
217 |
46 |
|
Cliff Lee |
8 |
12 |
4 |
14 |
23 |
37 |
164 |
61 |
|
Patrick Corbin |
9 |
17 |
8 |
14 |
23 |
37 |
164 |
61 |
|
Chris Tillman |
10 |
7 |
-3 |
16 |
20 |
36 |
125 |
80 |
|
Bronson Arroyo |
11 |
20 |
9 |
14 |
22 |
36 |
157 |
64 |
|
Jon Lester |
12 |
10 |
-2 |
15 |
20 |
35 |
133 |
75 |
|
Kris Medlen |
13 |
16 |
3 |
14 |
21 |
35 |
150 |
67 |
|
Doug Fister |
14 |
21 |
7 |
14 |
21 |
35 |
150 |
67 |
|
Hisashi Iwakuma |
15 |
26 |
11 |
13 |
22 |
35 |
169 |
59 |
|
Madison Bumgarner |
16 |
27 |
11 |
13 |
22 |
35 |
169 |
59 |
|
Mike Minor |
17 |
31 |
14 |
13 |
22 |
35 |
169 |
59 |
|
Jarrod Parker |
18 |
42 |
24 |
12 |
23 |
35 |
192 |
52 |
|
Anibal Sanchez |
19 |
11 |
-8 |
14 |
20 |
34 |
143 |
70 |
|
Mat Latos |
20 |
15 |
-5 |
14 |
20 |
34 |
143 |
70 |
|
Yu Darvish |
21 |
28 |
7 |
13 |
21 |
34 |
162 |
62 |
|
Hyun-Jin Ryu |
22 |
29 |
7 |
13 |
21 |
34 |
162 |
62 |
|
Justin Verlander |
23 |
33 |
10 |
13 |
21 |
34 |
162 |
62 |
|
Chris Sale |
24 |
45 |
21 |
11 |
23 |
34 |
209 |
48 |
|
Jorge De La Rosa |
25 |
6 |
-19 |
16 |
17 |
33 |
106 |
94 |
|
Jhoulys Chacin |
26 |
14 |
-12 |
14 |
19 |
33 |
136 |
74 |
|
Felix Hernandez |
27 |
37 |
10 |
12 |
21 |
33 |
175 |
57 |
|
Travis Wood |
28 |
66 |
38 |
9 |
24 |
33 |
267 |
38 |
|
Zack Greinke |
29 |
9 |
-20 |
15 |
17 |
32 |
113 |
88 |
|
Justin Masterson |
30 |
19 |
-11 |
14 |
18 |
32 |
129 |
78 |
|
Lance Lynn |
31 |
24 |
-7 |
14 |
18 |
32 |
129 |
78 |
|
Jose Fernandez |
32 |
36 |
4 |
12 |
20 |
32 |
167 |
60 |
|
Derek Holland |
33 |
54 |
21 |
10 |
22 |
32 |
220 |
45 |
|
Ervin Santana |
34 |
67 |
33 |
9 |
23 |
32 |
256 |
39 |
|
Cole Hamels |
35 |
74 |
39 |
8 |
24 |
32 |
300 |
33 |
|
Jeremy Guthrie |
36 |
23 |
-13 |
14 |
17 |
31 |
121 |
82 |
|
Julio Teheran |
37 |
30 |
-7 |
13 |
18 |
31 |
138 |
72 |
|
R.A. Dickey |
38 |
34 |
-4 |
13 |
18 |
31 |
138 |
72 |
|
Rick Porcello |
39 |
35 |
-4 |
13 |
18 |
31 |
138 |
72 |
|
Gio Gonzalez |
40 |
47 |
7 |
11 |
20 |
31 |
182 |
55 |
|
Homer Bailey |
41 |
48 |
7 |
11 |
20 |
31 |
182 |
55 |
|
Mike Leake |
42 |
18 |
-24 |
14 |
16 |
30 |
114 |
88 |
|
CC Sabathia |
43 |
25 |
-18 |
14 |
16 |
30 |
114 |
88 |
|
Ricky Nolasco |
44 |
32 |
-12 |
13 |
17 |
30 |
131 |
76 |
|
Mark Buehrle |
45 |
43 |
-2 |
12 |
18 |
30 |
150 |
67 |
|
Hiroki Kuroda |
46 |
46 |
0 |
11 |
19 |
30 |
173 |
58 |
|
Wade Miley |
47 |
58 |
11 |
10 |
20 |
30 |
200 |
50 |
|
A.J. Griffin |
48 |
22 |
-26 |
14 |
15 |
29 |
107 |
93 |
|
Scott Feldman |
49 |
40 |
-9 |
12 |
17 |
29 |
142 |
71 |
|
Andrew Cashner |
50 |
53 |
3 |
10 |
19 |
29 |
190 |
53 |
|
Kyle Lohse |
51 |
55 |
4 |
10 |
19 |
29 |
190 |
53 |
|
John Lackey |
52 |
57 |
5 |
10 |
19 |
29 |
190 |
53 |
|
Eric Stults |
53 |
60 |
7 |
10 |
19 |
29 |
190 |
53 |
|
Matt Harvey |
54 |
65 |
11 |
9 |
20 |
29 |
222 |
45 |
|
Dillon Gee |
55 |
41 |
-14 |
12 |
16 |
28 |
133 |
75 |
|
Wily Peralta |
56 |
51 |
-5 |
11 |
17 |
28 |
155 |
65 |
|
Andy Pettitte |
57 |
59 |
2 |
10 |
18 |
28 |
180 |
56 |
|
Miguel Gonzalez |
58 |
61 |
3 |
10 |
18 |
28 |
180 |
56 |
|
Felix Doubront |
59 |
49 |
-10 |
11 |
16 |
27 |
145 |
69 |
|
Yovani Gallardo |
60 |
50 |
-10 |
11 |
16 |
27 |
145 |
69 |
|
Kyle Kendrick |
61 |
64 |
3 |
10 |
17 |
27 |
170 |
59 |
|
Matt Cain |
62 |
75 |
13 |
8 |
19 |
27 |
238 |
42 |
|
Shelby Miller |
63 |
13 |
-50 |
14 |
12 |
26 |
86 |
117 |
|
Ubaldo Jimenez |
64 |
39 |
-25 |
12 |
14 |
26 |
117 |
86 |
|
Bud Norris |
65 |
62 |
-3 |
10 |
16 |
26 |
160 |
63 |
|
A.J. Burnett |
66 |
68 |
2 |
9 |
17 |
26 |
189 |
53 |
|
Jose Quintana |
67 |
69 |
2 |
9 |
17 |
26 |
189 |
53 |
|
Jeff Samardzija |
68 |
76 |
8 |
8 |
18 |
26 |
225 |
44 |
|
Kevin Correia |
69 |
70 |
1 |
9 |
16 |
25 |
178 |
56 |
|
Joe Saunders |
70 |
52 |
-18 |
11 |
13 |
24 |
118 |
85 |
|
Tim Lincecum |
71 |
63 |
-8 |
10 |
14 |
24 |
140 |
71 |
|
David Price |
72 |
73 |
1 |
8 |
16 |
24 |
200 |
50 |
|
Stephen Strasburg |
73 |
79 |
6 |
7 |
17 |
24 |
243 |
41 |
|
Jeremy Hellickson |
74 |
44 |
-30 |
12 |
11 |
23 |
92 |
109 |
|
Jeff Locke |
75 |
56 |
-19 |
10 |
13 |
23 |
130 |
77 |
|
Dan Haren |
76 |
72 |
-4 |
9 |
14 |
23 |
156 |
64 |
|
Ryan Dempster |
77 |
77 |
0 |
8 |
14 |
22 |
175 |
57 |
|
Edwin Jackson |
78 |
78 |
0 |
8 |
14 |
22 |
175 |
57 |
|
Jerome Williams |
79 |
71 |
-8 |
9 |
11 |
20 |
122 |
82 |
|
Ian Kennedy |
80 |
80 |
0 |
6 |
13 |
19 |
217 |
46 |
In fantasy, the 5 categories are meant to evaluate the overall value of a pitcher, and players that are best able to predict future value can win serious jelly beans. A pitcher accumulates Ks by defeating individual batters, while a low WHIP indicates that he can avoid putting opposing players on base. ERA evaluates a pitcher’s run prevention skill. Saves and wins are meant to measure a pitcher’s ability to dominate opposing teams, whether for an inning or an entire game. However, wins compare poorly with quality starts and W+QS when correlated with commonly used pitching statistics.
The chart below shows the correlation between wins, quality starts, and the combination of the two with other commonly used pitcher evaluation metrics. By calculating the correlation between these 3 categories and other pitcher metrics such as FIP, OPS allowed, batting average against, homeruns allowed per 9 innings, and runs above average by the 24 base/out states (RE24), we can measure not only the relationship between the variables, but also how much they differ from each other.
None of these statistics correlate as well with wins as they do with quality starts and W+QS. In fact, the difference between QS and W+QS is negligible in every case. This result makes sense—since QS make up the majority of the W+QS total, the two are almost identical in the chart. The actual values of each correlation are less important that the overwhelming conclusion that wins do not have much to do with pitcher skill, while the difference between QS and W+QS is negligible.
Why, then, might it be useful to use W+QS? These results show that it may not be very different from using quality starts, but is far more reliable way to judge a pitcher’s performance than wins alone. W+QS double count the games when a pitcher goes somewhat deep into a game, pitches fairly well (3 ER or less), and exits the game while leading his opponent. This scenario might not be much different than the QS by itself, but it does retain an element of “winning the ballgame for your team”, which is what the win category somewhat accurately captures. A winning pitcher is generally on a winning team, although that statement may not mean much.
W+QS may be an unnecessarily complicated way to repeat the same evaluation standards as quality starts, but some players may prefer it simply because it retains the W while relegating it to a position of less importance. Maybe owning a great pitcher like James Shields doesn’t have to be so frustrating after all.
My league’s been using (W+QS-L) for years, to much good effect.
this is what we do in my fantasy points league. +5 for a win, +5 for the QS, -5 for a loss. That way a pitcher doesn’t get penalized for the loss as long as it was a quality start, but still gets rewarded for earning the win for their team.
If wins are a bad statistic in regards to measuring a pitcher’s quality, adding it to an arbitrary statistic such as quality starts does not make it better. I think part of the problem is an insistence on having an equal number of categories for hitters an pitchers. A offensive player has multiple paths to a successful appearance. They can get one of several varieties of hit or they can draw a walk. They can drive in other players or be themselves driven in. They can steal bases. A pitcher either allows baserunners or not. Those baserunners either score or not.
Perhaps we need to use fewer categories to represent pitchers and weight them differently than the offensive categories. This is not a trivial change and I have not completely fleshed out the idea, but if we keep the pitchers measured on things they can “control”, for example strikeouts, walks, innings pitched, and baserunners stranded, we all might feel like our pitchers are better represented in the standings.
Today’s game has changed to the point where wins are not what they once were.
Pitchers up to probably 30 years ago or so were expected to pitch complete games. Many did and out pitched their rival pitcher. Hence the pitchers win was important. Pitching only 5-6 innings severely restricts along with pitch counts the ability for a starter to accumulate wins. If a pitcher is unable to pitch deep into games for whatever reason they do not deserve a win. Don’t blame offensive support or lack of. The real reason is they do not pitch deep into games. And if they do and lose 1-0, they got out pitched by their opponent and deserve the loss.
I know I’m late on this, but I’m currently looking into the possibility of weighted wins. This requires two new terms invented solely for the purpose of weighted wins. Win by Quality Start or WQS. A WQS is achieved by getting both a win and quality start. Win Without Quality Start or WWQ. This is quite simply a win that was not produced by a quality start. The formula then would be: WQS + (WWQ*0.5) = weighted wins(WW)
I believe this proves to be an efficient indicator of wins produced by a starting pitcher. It is also fairly easy to calculate.
I am trying desperately to get my auction keeper league to switch to W+QS and this article seems to have helped move the debate in my favor. This just validates what astute fantasy baseball fans have known intuitively for quite some time.