Tweet
I guess xFIP is better for predicting future results, especially for pitchers who are getting lucky/unlucky with HR's allowed.
But it seems as though tERA is, at the very least, more telling than FIP. Interesting seeing some of our pitchers' stats, and how tERA seems somewhat more telling than FIP, in terms of predicting what their ERA's should be. Nolasco, for example, has a FIP/xFIP that says he's a mid-to-high 3 ERA guy, while his career tERA of 4.15 seems much more like him, in terms of what his ERA's have been over the years.
Basically, I don't get why tERA doesn't seemed to get mentioned nearly as much as the other two statistics (FIP/xFIP). Both by board members and those who analyze professionally.
Any thoughts on this from those who are more well-informed? Thx.
But it seems as though tERA is, at the very least, more telling than FIP. Interesting seeing some of our pitchers' stats, and how tERA seems somewhat more telling than FIP, in terms of predicting what their ERA's should be. Nolasco, for example, has a FIP/xFIP that says he's a mid-to-high 3 ERA guy, while his career tERA of 4.15 seems much more like him, in terms of what his ERA's have been over the years.
Basically, I don't get why tERA doesn't seemed to get mentioned nearly as much as the other two statistics (FIP/xFIP). Both by board members and those who analyze professionally.
Any thoughts on this from those who are more well-informed? Thx.
Comment