I agree, ERA did say that Smoltz was a good deal worse than Brown. I took a look at the two pitcher’s FIP values, whcih evaluates them on the basis of K’s, HR’s, and BB’s and puts them in a scale of ERA, and Smoltz’s was slightly below Brown’s that season. Also, Brown pitched 20 less innings. By that measure, I went with Smoltz.

Of course, both were pretty deserving candidates, I’d say. If you go by Rally’s WAR totals over at his Baseball Projection site, you get a Brown with a WAR of 7.5, while Smoltz had a WAR of 6.1. In that case, I would say Brown won. I’m not really sure which WAR method of measuring pitchers should be used.

Hey, I agree with you that we shouldn’t just be looking at wins in this case. Brown had a ridiculously good season, and if we use Rally’s method of measuring WAR (taking earned runs and removing prorated defensive contribution) he is the clear winner. Having not checked that prior to saying my comment, I’d say I would retract my statement and lean towards the Brown argument. I only gave the question a cursory glance at first using FIP, though FIP says Smoltz’s defense-independent performance was better that year.

As for your increasingly ad hominem attacks regarding me, you didn’t look closely enough at what I am saying. Important situations in games aren’t measured just by the base/out state or inning/score situation, but rather all of those aspects combined. Leverage tells you what situations are more important.

Example:

First inning, 1 out, no one on, tie game
vs.
First inning, 1 out, bases loaded, tie game

Which one is more important? I think we can all agree it’s the second one. The second situation has a leverage in the 3’s, the other one has a leverage in the 0.8’s. Is one more “clutch” than the other? I think we can both say yes to that.

So why use the “tie game” split when it includes both situations and, as you’re using it, describes them as the same level of clutch? They clearly don’t. That’s why I’ve been offering High Leverage splits as the way to determine clutch performance, because that split yields all clutch situations, regardless of the individual base/out states or inning/score states.

Finally, if you’re taking it as arrogance, I apologize. I’ve tried to be as patient in my explanations as possible. You have increasingly been hostile in your tone, and it really has made it difficult to have an appropriate discussion. I’ve answered all your points every time you’ve posted, and from what I can tell, you’re simply restating your points while mostly ignoring mine. I’ve pointed out different sources for my thinking, which I’m sure you’ve also ignored.

That being said, here’s a final source. Tom Tango has a leverage index chart for each base/out/inning/score state possible in regulation. You can look at it here, then you can tell me whether you don’t buy how the leverage split is done. The way B-R does it, high leverage is considered LI > 1.5. You can find all the types of situations that have an LI > 1.5 and see if they jive with how you think. If you don’t buy it, then again, we have an impasse and we’ll have to respectfully disagree on this clutch definition. Please check out the chart and tell me what you think.

The only category that Smoltz dominated Brown in that year was run support.

Talk about decimating one’s credibility.

Or READING ability… YOU were the one pumping up an earkly-game stat for McCutchen as being important… then pooh-poohing the idea of early-game stats when it reflected well on Coghlan.

Hell, I QUOTED you as such in the 8:54 a.m. post.

I find your arrogance (ignoring the quotes of yours that showed your hypocrisy, for one) to be as uncivilized as any words I have used in this discussion.