{"id":4837,"date":"2017-04-06T17:39:21","date_gmt":"2017-04-06T21:39:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lastwordonbaseball.com\/?p=4837"},"modified":"2017-04-06T17:39:29","modified_gmt":"2017-04-06T21:39:29","slug":"quality-start-needs-redefining","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lastwordonsports.com\/baseball\/2017\/04\/06\/quality-start-needs-redefining\/","title":{"rendered":"“Quality Start” Needs Redefining"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tracking quality starts has been commonplace in evaluating pitchers since John Lowe introduced the term in 1985<\/a>. A starting pitcher earns a quality start when he pitches six or more innings while allowing three or fewer earned runs. However, one must question whether three earned runs allowed per start is representative of a quality pitcher. Many factors contribute to whether or not a pitcher puts forth a quality outing, and innings pitched plus earned runs allowed is just a small portion of the equation.<\/p>\n

\u201cQuality Start\u201d Needs Redefining<\/h2>\n

Definition of Quality<\/h3>\n

Merriam-Webster defines quality as \u201ca degree of excellence; superiority in kind<\/a>.\u201d Using this definition, a quality start is in fact not a quality performance. A pitcher who posts a quality start for every start will eventually end up with an ERA of 4.50. Most baseball fans will quickly identify that a 4.50 ERA is not good, but here are the numbers to back that up.<\/p>\n

According to Fangraphs, of the 73 qualified starting pitchers in 2016, 55 posted an ERA lower than 4.50. This means that about 75%, an overwhelming majority, of the qualified pitchers last season posted an ERA better than what a quality start average would produce. A 4.50 ERA cannot be considered quality if such a large number of pitchers achieved that mark. Anything that becomes commonplace, or average, cannot be considered quality. By contrast, the top 25% of pitchers posted an ERA equal to or less than 3.21. A 3.20 ERA spread over 180 innings would equal 64 earned runs. 64 runs divided by 30 starts comes out to a little over two runs per game, so it would be more accurate to say a quality start is six innings pitched and two or fewer earned runs allowed.<\/p>\n

Obviously, there are some issues with this equation. Not all qualified pitchers reach 180 innings pitched, and not all pitchers will make it through six innings on a consistent basis. Baseball Reference even points out that a quality start simply means<\/a> one that \u201callows (the) team a much better than even chance to win the game.\u201d The formal definition of quality may be considered irrelevant here; however, this equation still provides a solid base for discussing what makes a pitcher \u201cquality.\u201d<\/p>\n

League Average<\/h3>\n

It is necessary to establish a baseline for further evaluating pitchers. After all, it is well-proven that runs have bee allowed at differing rates across the different eras of baseball. The 1.56 ERA Greg Maddux<\/a><\/strong> posted in 1994 looks much different from the 1.77 ERA that Clayton Kershaw<\/a><\/strong> posted in 2014. Both are remarkably impressive numbers, but both need perspective in order for their full scope to be understood.<\/p>\n

The best way to bring perspective, or to provide a baseline, is to examine what the league-wide ERA is in a given season. The league average performance must be established in order to determine what makes a quality performance. The 73 qualified starting pitchers in 2016 allowed a total of 5,911 earned runs in 13,793.2 innings pitched, which produces a 3.86 ERA. It becomes easier and easier to see how a quality start, which produces a 4.50 ERA, is not truly\u00a0quality. In reality, a \u201cquality start\u201d was a below average performance for a starting pitcher in 2016. This does not mean that the term \u201cquality start\u201d is never appropriate. The league-wide ERA in 2000 was 4.77. A 4.50 ERA would have been above-average, and a \u201cquality start\u201d would have been a true picture of quality pitching.<\/p>\n

The Quality Start is not a Quality Stat<\/h3>\n

The bottom line is that the quality start statistic is outdated. It is too black-and-white to be used in conjunction with other, constantly fluctuating stats. Bill James<\/a><\/strong>\u2019 Game Score<\/a> stat is good in some areas, but falls short in others. The examination of quality starts is a good reminder that there is no perfect stat, no single measure of a baseball player\u2019s performance. A number of different statistics are needed to gauge a performance, and a quality start is not always a quality performance.<\/p>\n

Main Photo:<\/p>\n

\n
Embed from Getty Images<\/a><\/div>\n