Adjusted W-L Record
In the world of fantasy baseball a win is a win and a loss is a loss. Regardless of how bad a win may be or how good a loss may be, the above statement will seemingly always hold true. Fantasy leagues do not care about Cheap Wins and Tough Losses, but it is my strong conviction that you should care.
With that in mind I would like to introduce you to another statistic of mine – The Adjusted W-L Record. Since W-L records tend to indicate luck instead of skill, Adjusted W-L gives us a tangible record that truly measures the performance level of a pitcher. No-Decisions are not counted so the Adj. W-L is designed to show skill relative to decisions received. It answers the question most of us want a regular W-L to answer – What would happen if a pitcher got a win for every well-pitched decision and a loss for every poorly-pitched decision?
W-L Breakdown
A W-L record consists of Cheap Wins, Tough Losses, Legit Wins, and Legit Losses, all of which revolve around the AQS. If you record an AQS and win it is a Legit Win. Recording an AQS and losing is a Tough Loss. Failing to record an AQS and winning is a Cheap Win and failing to record an AQS and losing is a Legit Loss.
Adjusted W-L isolates the cheapies and toughies from the legitimate decisions and then re-inserts them backwards. Cheap Wins become losses and Tough Losses become wins. If W-L records are going to be a barometer of quality, we might as well use a version of it that actually tells us about quality.
In 2007, Josh Beckett went 20-7 and mostly everybody loved him. Despite such a solid record he finished #8 in the AL in 2007 SP Effectiveness System. How did this happen? Well, it wasn’t that Beckett was bad, because his 20-7 would barely be adjusted to a 19-8, but the guys listed higher than he had better Adjusted W-L.
We cannot help ourselves, when seeing one, to equate a W-L record to quality. It is assumed that Beckett, at 20-7, was better than Dan Haren and his 15-9 record. Beckett’s 20-7 gets adjusted to a 19-8, but take a closer look at Haren. Most will say he performed better than a 15-9 record would indicate but have trouble pinpointing how much better.
Haren had 0 Cheap Wins, 15 Legit Wins, 3 Legit Losses, and 6 Tough Losses. Using the formula his Adjusted W-L in 2007 would be 21-3. Fausto Carmona’s 19-8 becomes a 23-4. Mark Buehrle’s 10-9 turns into a 15-4 and John Lackey’s 19-9 was actually closer to a 22-6. If all of these guys posted the records they should have posted, based on how well they performed, do you think there would be any problem or odd reaction to seeing Beckett below them on my system? I tend to think not.
Fantasy Application
Even though fantasy leagues do not differentiate a Cheap Win from a Legit Win, and so forth, I have found that those with the best Adjusted W-L records usually post the best peripheral statistics (WHIP, K:BB, IP, IP/GM).
Here is a PDF file showing the Adjusted W-L data of the NL pitchers in 2007.
Looking at Adjusted W-L records not only tells you who the best guys were at reaching certain statistical plateaus that are counted in fantasy leagues, but it also paves the way into the field of luck.
Net Luck Rating
An interesting way to use this involves looking at how lucky or unlucky a pitcher has been over a period of time. We can find a pitcher’s Net Luck Rating by subtracting his Tough Losses from his Cheap Wins, and adding that to ½ the difference of AQND’s from Non-AQND’s. As a quick refresher, an AQND is a AQS with a no-decision and I think you can figure the other one out.
Carlos Zambrano, in 2007, went 18-13. He had 0 Cheap Wins and 2 Tough Losses. He only had 2 No-Decisions and both were Non-AQND. His Net Luck Rating would be:
= (CH. W) – (T.L) + 0.5(Non-AQND – AQND)
= (0) – (2) + 0.5(2 – 0)
= -2 + 1
= -1 NLR
Zambrano’s 2007 Net Luck Rating was –1, meaning he was just slightly unlucky. Negative numbers indicate the pitcher was unlucky and positive numbers reflect luck. In 2001, Roger Clemens won the Cy Young Award with a 20-3 record. He had 6 Cheap Wins, 0 Tough Losses, 6 Non-AQND, and 4 AQND. His NLR would have been:
= (6 – 0) + 0.5(6 – 4)
= 6 + 1
= +7 NLR
In other words, Clemens was very lucky.
In case you are wondering why the No-Decisions are multiplied by 0.5 the reason deals with the fact that No-Decisions, while preventative of the pitcher receiving the correct decision, do not adversely effect the W-L record, whereas Cheap Wins and Tough Losses do.
Conclusion
My database of starting pitchers is complete and it dates back to 2000. I am currently turning it into an official register/guide. The PDF document will be free and available at MLB Front Office as well as my personal website, www.ericjseidman.com.
The register includes year-by-year statistics for all pitchers in the database and I plan to make this an annual “publication.” Stay tuned as it will be complete before the end of February. If we want to use W-L records as a barometer for fantasy quality, use my Adjusted W-L since it shows the skill, not luck, that we seek in a W-L record.
With that in mind I would like to introduce you to another statistic of mine – The Adjusted W-L Record. Since W-L records tend to indicate luck instead of skill, Adjusted W-L gives us a tangible record that truly measures the performance level of a pitcher. No-Decisions are not counted so the Adj. W-L is designed to show skill relative to decisions received. It answers the question most of us want a regular W-L to answer – What would happen if a pitcher got a win for every well-pitched decision and a loss for every poorly-pitched decision?
A W-L record consists of Cheap Wins, Tough Losses, Legit Wins, and Legit Losses, all of which revolve around the AQS. If you record an AQS and win it is a Legit Win. Recording an AQS and losing is a Tough Loss. Failing to record an AQS and winning is a Cheap Win and failing to record an AQS and losing is a Legit Loss.
Adjusted W-L isolates the cheapies and toughies from the legitimate decisions and then re-inserts them backwards. Cheap Wins become losses and Tough Losses become wins. If W-L records are going to be a barometer of quality, we might as well use a version of it that actually tells us about quality.
In 2007, Josh Beckett went 20-7 and mostly everybody loved him. Despite such a solid record he finished #8 in the AL in 2007 SP Effectiveness System. How did this happen? Well, it wasn’t that Beckett was bad, because his 20-7 would barely be adjusted to a 19-8, but the guys listed higher than he had better Adjusted W-L.
We cannot help ourselves, when seeing one, to equate a W-L record to quality. It is assumed that Beckett, at 20-7, was better than Dan Haren and his 15-9 record. Beckett’s 20-7 gets adjusted to a 19-8, but take a closer look at Haren. Most will say he performed better than a 15-9 record would indicate but have trouble pinpointing how much better.
Haren had 0 Cheap Wins, 15 Legit Wins, 3 Legit Losses, and 6 Tough Losses. Using the formula his Adjusted W-L in 2007 would be 21-3. Fausto Carmona’s 19-8 becomes a 23-4. Mark Buehrle’s 10-9 turns into a 15-4 and John Lackey’s 19-9 was actually closer to a 22-6. If all of these guys posted the records they should have posted, based on how well they performed, do you think there would be any problem or odd reaction to seeing Beckett below them on my system? I tend to think not.
Even though fantasy leagues do not differentiate a Cheap Win from a Legit Win, and so forth, I have found that those with the best Adjusted W-L records usually post the best peripheral statistics (WHIP, K:BB, IP, IP/GM).
Here is a PDF file showing the Adjusted W-L data of the NL pitchers in 2007.
Looking at Adjusted W-L records not only tells you who the best guys were at reaching certain statistical plateaus that are counted in fantasy leagues, but it also paves the way into the field of luck.
Net Luck Rating
An interesting way to use this involves looking at how lucky or unlucky a pitcher has been over a period of time. We can find a pitcher’s Net Luck Rating by subtracting his Tough Losses from his Cheap Wins, and adding that to ½ the difference of AQND’s from Non-AQND’s. As a quick refresher, an AQND is a AQS with a no-decision and I think you can figure the other one out.
Carlos Zambrano, in 2007, went 18-13. He had 0 Cheap Wins and 2 Tough Losses. He only had 2 No-Decisions and both were Non-AQND. His Net Luck Rating would be:
= (CH. W) – (T.L) + 0.5(Non-AQND – AQND)
= (0) – (2) + 0.5(2 – 0)
= -2 + 1
= -1 NLR
Zambrano’s 2007 Net Luck Rating was –1, meaning he was just slightly unlucky. Negative numbers indicate the pitcher was unlucky and positive numbers reflect luck. In 2001, Roger Clemens won the Cy Young Award with a 20-3 record. He had 6 Cheap Wins, 0 Tough Losses, 6 Non-AQND, and 4 AQND. His NLR would have been:
= (6 – 0) + 0.5(6 – 4)
= 6 + 1
= +7 NLR
In other words, Clemens was very lucky.
In case you are wondering why the No-Decisions are multiplied by 0.5 the reason deals with the fact that No-Decisions, while preventative of the pitcher receiving the correct decision, do not adversely effect the W-L record, whereas Cheap Wins and Tough Losses do.
My database of starting pitchers is complete and it dates back to 2000. I am currently turning it into an official register/guide. The PDF document will be free and available at MLB Front Office as well as my personal website, www.ericjseidman.com.
The register includes year-by-year statistics for all pitchers in the database and I plan to make this an annual “publication.” Stay tuned as it will be complete before the end of February. If we want to use W-L records as a barometer for fantasy quality, use my Adjusted W-L since it shows the skill, not luck, that we seek in a W-L record.
