Radio Station KZWL
It understates the case to say that strikeouts and walks are the foundation of a pitcher’s record. They are more than that. Strikeouts and walks, to extend the analogy of the structure, are more like the foundation and framework of the career. Yes, there is more to a skyscraper than its iron frame; there are interior and exterior walls, there are floors and carpets and elevators. It is the framework that gives shape and substance to the whole.
On the occasion of the retirement of Curt Schilling, it occurred to me to wonder what the won-lost record would be that was equivalent to his strikeout/walk ratio. Obviously Schilling has a very good career won-lost record—216-146, plus 11-2 in post-season—and obviously he had an even better strikeout/walk ratio. If you stated his strikeout/walk ratio as a won-lost record, I wondered, what would it be?
Once we reach the point of posing that question, the way to get the answer is surprisingly obvious. Strikeouts must be expressed as wins, and walks must be held responsible for losses. For every 18 innings pitched there must be one win and one loss. The way to translate strikeouts into wins, then, is simply to divide the pitcher’s strikeouts by two times the league average of strikeouts per 9 innings (which is the league average of strikeouts per 18 innings.) To express walks as losses, divide the pitcher’s walks by two times the league average of walks per 9 innings. Doing that for the league as a whole, the strike zone won-lost record has to be essentially the same as the actual won-lost record.
That’s all there is to the method; there is no six pages of formulas necessary this time to explain the details. That’s it. I’ll get back to Schilling in a few pages, but first let’s create context by looking at some other pitchers. Ervin (Nice Hair) Santana in 2008 struck out 214 batters. The American League average was 6.64 strikeouts per nine innings or 13.28 strikeouts per eighteen innings. 214 divided by 13.28 is 16.11, so we credit Santana with 16 “strike zone wins” (which I would call KZW if I didn’t despise acronyms.)
Santana walked 47 batters, and the American League average was 3.32 walks per nine innings, or 6.65 walks per eighteen innings. 47 divided by 6.65 is 7.07, so we charge Santana with 7 strike zone losses (KZL). His strike zone won-lost was 16-7, which happens to be the same as his actual won-lost record.
There were only three major league pitchers in 2008 (162 or more innings) whose strike zone won-lost records duplicated their actual wins and losses:
|
Pitcher
|
W-L
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZWL
|
|
Ervin Santana
|
16-7
|
214
|
47
|
16-7
|
|
Gil Meche
|
14-11
|
183
|
73
|
14-11
|
|
John Danks
|
12-9
|
159
|
57
|
12-9
|
Only those three pitchers had exactly the same strike zone won-lost records as actual wins and losses, but at least half of major league pitchers must be said to have had similar strike zone to actual won-lost records. There were 88 major league pitchers in 2008 who pitched 162 or more innings. This is the data above for 44 of those pitchers—in all cases a fairly similar actual to strike zone won-lost log:
|
Name
|
Team
|
W
|
L
|
Pct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWpct
|
|
Arroyo,Bronson
|
Reds
|
15
|
11
|
.577
|
163
|
68
|
12
|
10
|
.542
|
|
Backe,Brandon
|
Astros
|
9
|
14
|
.391
|
127
|
77
|
9
|
11
|
.449
|
|
Baker,Scott
|
Twins
|
11
|
4
|
.733
|
141
|
42
|
11
|
6
|
.627
|
|
Billingsley,Chad
|
Dodgers
|
16
|
10
|
.615
|
201
|
80
|
14
|
12
|
.554
|
|
Blanton,Joe
|
Phillies
|
9
|
12
|
.429
|
111
|
66
|
8
|
10
|
.454
|
|
Burnett,A.J.
|
Blue Jays
|
18
|
10
|
.643
|
231
|
86
|
17
|
13
|
.573
|
|
Bush,David
|
Brewers
|
9
|
10
|
.474
|
109
|
48
|
8
|
7
|
.529
|
|
Cabrera,Daniel
|
Orioles
|
8
|
10
|
.444
|
95
|
90
|
7
|
14
|
.346
|
|
Danks,John
|
White Sox
|
12
|
9
|
.571
|
159
|
57
|
12
|
9
|
.583
|
|
Eveland,Dana
|
Athletics
|
9
|
9
|
.500
|
118
|
77
|
9
|
12
|
.434
|
|
Garza,Matt
|
Rays
|
11
|
9
|
.550
|
128
|
59
|
10
|
9
|
.521
|
|
Greinke,Zack
|
Royals
|
13
|
10
|
.565
|
183
|
56
|
14
|
8
|
.621
|
|
Guthrie,Jeremy
|
Orioles
|
10
|
12
|
.455
|
120
|
58
|
9
|
9
|
.509
|
|
Hamels,Cole
|
Phillies
|
14
|
10
|
.583
|
196
|
53
|
14
|
8
|
.646
|
|
Haren,Dan
|
Diamondbacks
|
16
|
8
|
.667
|
206
|
40
|
15
|
6
|
.718
|
|
Jimenez,Ubaldo
|
Rockies
|
12
|
12
|
.500
|
172
|
103
|
12
|
15
|
.452
|
|
Jurrjens,Jair
|
Braves
|
13
|
10
|
.565
|
139
|
70
|
10
|
10
|
.495
|
|
Kuroda,Hiroki
|
Dodgers
|
9
|
10
|
.474
|
116
|
42
|
8
|
6
|
.577
|
|
Lackey,John
|
Angels
|
12
|
5
|
.706
|
130
|
40
|
10
|
6
|
.619
|
|
Lannan,John
|
Nationals
|
9
|
15
|
.375
|
117
|
72
|
8
|
10
|
.445
|
|
Lilly,Ted
|
Cubs
|
17
|
9
|
.654
|
184
|
64
|
13
|
9
|
.587
|
|
Maholm,Paul
|
Pirates
|
9
|
9
|
.500
|
139
|
63
|
10
|
9
|
.521
|
|
Meche,Gil
|
Royals
|
14
|
11
|
.560
|
183
|
73
|
14
|
11
|
.556
|
|
Millwood,Kevin
|
Rangers
|
9
|
10
|
.474
|
125
|
49
|
9
|
7
|
.561
|
|
Nolasco,Ricky
|
Marlins
|
15
|
8
|
.652
|
186
|
42
|
13
|
6
|
.686
|
|
Olsen,Scott
|
Marlins
|
8
|
11
|
.421
|
113
|
69
|
8
|
10
|
.447
|
|
Parra,Manny
|
Brewers
|
10
|
8
|
.556
|
147
|
75
|
11
|
11
|
.492
|
|
Peavy,Jake
|
Padres
|
10
|
11
|
.476
|
166
|
59
|
12
|
9
|
.581
|
|
Redding,Tim
|
Nationals
|
10
|
11
|
.476
|
120
|
65
|
9
|
9
|
.477
|
|
Robertson,Nate
|
Tigers
|
7
|
11
|
.389
|
108
|
62
|
8
|
9
|
.466
|
|
Rogers,Kenny
|
Tigers
|
9
|
13
|
.409
|
82
|
71
|
6
|
11
|
.366
|
|
Sabathia,CC
|
Brewers
|
17
|
10
|
.630
|
251
|
59
|
18
|
9
|
.679
|
|
Santana,Ervin
|
Angels
|
16
|
7
|
.696
|
214
|
47
|
16
|
7
|
.695
|
|
Santana,Johan
|
Mets
|
16
|
7
|
.696
|
206
|
63
|
15
|
9
|
.618
|
|
Sheets,Ben
|
Brewers
|
13
|
9
|
.591
|
158
|
47
|
11
|
7
|
.624
|
|
Shields,James
|
Rays
|
14
|
8
|
.636
|
160
|
40
|
12
|
6
|
.667
|
|
Smith,Greg
|
Athletics
|
7
|
16
|
.304
|
111
|
87
|
8
|
13
|
.390
|
|
Snell,Ian
|
Pirates
|
7
|
12
|
.368
|
135
|
89
|
10
|
13
|
.428
|
|
Suppan,Jeff
|
Brewers
|
10
|
10
|
.500
|
90
|
67
|
6
|
10
|
.399
|
|
Wakefield,Tim
|
Red Sox
|
10
|
11
|
.476
|
117
|
60
|
9
|
9
|
.494
|
|
Weaver,Jered
|
Angels
|
11
|
10
|
.524
|
152
|
54
|
11
|
8
|
.585
|
|
Wellemeyer,Todd
|
Cardinals
|
13
|
9
|
.591
|
134
|
62
|
10
|
9
|
.516
|
|
Wolf,Randy
|
Astros
|
12
|
12
|
.500
|
162
|
71
|
12
|
10
|
.530
|
|
Zito,Barry
|
Giants
|
10
|
17
|
.370
|
120
|
102
|
9
|
15
|
.367
|
And, of course, in some cases they don’t match. In 2007 Daisuke Matsuzaka was one of those three or four pitchers whose strike zone won-lost record (15-12) was exactly the same as his actual record. In 2008, however, his actual won-lost record went up to 18-3, while his strike zone won-lost record went down to 12-14. (Will the real Daisuke Matsuzaka please stand up, and could it please be the one who pitches in the WBC?) The two pitchers whose actual won-lost records were most UN-like their strike zone won-lost records were Dice-K and Aaron Harang:
|
Name
|
Team
|
W
|
L
|
Pct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWpct
|
|
Matsuzaka,Daisuke
|
Red Sox
|
18
|
3
|
.857
|
154
|
94
|
12
|
14
|
.451
|
|
Harang,Aaron
|
Reds
|
6
|
17
|
.261
|
153
|
50
|
11
|
7
|
.602
|
There’s a complication I haven’t dealt with yet. The traditional scoring system has to assign every pitcher approximately one decision—one win or loss—for every nine innings pitched. Our system doesn’t have to do that, and sometimes doesn’t. If a pitcher strikes out and walks a lot of batters, we credit him with more decisions.
We could, of course, easily adjust this disparity out of existence—but do we want to? A pitcher who strikes out and walks hitters is exercising much more control over the outcome of the game than is a Livan Hernandez/Carlos Silva type pitcher who (overstating the case) just puts the ball over the plate and starts the action. There is a very good reason to assign them more wins and more losses. They earn them.
This actually turned out really neat, a serendipitous discrepancy. Livan Hernandez in 2008 pitched 180 innings—20 games—but had only 67 strikeouts, 43 walks. We credit him with only 5 wins (4.99), but charge him with only 6 defeats (6.41). Pitching the equivalent of 20 complete games, he is credited with only 11.40 strike zone decision.
We can state this as a “Power Index” by simply dividing the strike zone decisions (11.40) by the expected decisions (20)—or, if you prefer, by multiplying the strike zone decisions by 9, and dividing by innings pitched. Hernandez’ Power Index in 2008 was 0.57—the third-lowest of any major league pitcher working 162 or more innings. These are the highest and lowest power indexes among major league starting pitchers in 2008:
Highest
|
Name
|
Team
|
IP
|
SO
|
BB
|
Decisions
|
Power Index
|
|
Matsuzaka,Daisuke
|
Red Sox
|
167.7
|
154
|
94
|
25.73
|
1.381
|
|
Perez,Oliver
|
Mets
|
194.0
|
180
|
105
|
28.10
|
1.304
|
|
Volquez,Edinson
|
Reds
|
196.0
|
206
|
93
|
28.22
|
1.296
|
|
Snell,Ian
|
Pirates
|
164.3
|
135
|
89
|
22.56
|
1.236
|
|
Lincecum,Tim
|
Giants
|
227.0
|
265
|
84
|
31.14
|
1.235
|
Lowest
|
Name
|
Team
|
IP
|
SO
|
BB
|
Decisions
|
Power Index
|
|
Maddux,Greg
|
Dodgers
|
194.0
|
98
|
30
|
11.36
|
.527
|
|
Byrd,Paul
|
Red Sox
|
180.0
|
82
|
34
|
11.29
|
.564
|
|
Hernandez,Livan
|
Rockies
|
180.0
|
67
|
43
|
11.40
|
.570
|
|
Cook,Aaron
|
Rockies
|
211.3
|
96
|
48
|
13.83
|
.589
|
|
Blackburn,Nick
|
Twins
|
193.3
|
96
|
39
|
13.09
|
.610
|
Of course, I’ve developed Pitcher Power Indexes before, but I rather like this one. I think this may be a better way to get a power index for a pitcher than the methods I have previously used. Some people will object, as they always do, that in this system issuing walks increases a pitcher’s power index. “Walking people doesn’t make a pitcher a power pitcher,” they will say. “Getting strikeouts and weakly hit balls makes a pitcher a power pitcher. Walking people just means that you can’t find the strike zone.”
Fair enough, but that’s a semantic issue. When a pitcher walks a batter or strikes him out, he is taking control of the outcome away from the fielders—a type of power. If you don’t want to call it Power Index don’t call it that, but I think we have a clear concept of what we’re measuring.
Most pitchers who have long careers
a) start out with a power index over 1.00,
b) have a power index less than 1.00 at the end of their careers, and
c) have a career strike zone winning percentage which is similar to their actual winning percentage.
Let’s look at a few pitchers’ careers. Because his career has such a classical form, we’ll start with Warren Spahn:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPct
|
Power Index
|
|
Spahn
|
1942
|
0
|
0
|
.000
|
7
|
11
|
1
|
2
|
.381
|
1.505
|
|
Spahn
|
1946
|
8
|
5
|
.615
|
67
|
36
|
9
|
5
|
.648
|
1.026
|
|
Spahn
|
1947
|
21
|
10
|
.677
|
123
|
84
|
17
|
11
|
.592
|
.873
|
|
Spahn
|
1948
|
15
|
12
|
.556
|
114
|
77
|
15
|
11
|
.579
|
.888
|
|
Spahn
|
1949
|
21
|
14
|
.600
|
151
|
86
|
20
|
12
|
.628
|
.966
|
|
Spahn
|
1950
|
21
|
17
|
.553
|
191
|
111
|
23
|
15
|
.609
|
1.177
|
|
Spahn
|
1951
|
22
|
14
|
.611
|
164
|
109
|
21
|
15
|
.581
|
1.067
|
|
Spahn
|
1952
|
14
|
19
|
.424
|
183
|
73
|
21
|
11
|
.665
|
.997
|
|
Spahn
|
1953
|
23
|
7
|
.767
|
148
|
70
|
17
|
10
|
.627
|
.918
|
|
Spahn
|
1954
|
21
|
12
|
.636
|
136
|
86
|
16
|
12
|
.579
|
.901
|
|
Spahn
|
1955
|
17
|
14
|
.548
|
110
|
65
|
12
|
9
|
.570
|
.796
|
|
Spahn
|
1956
|
20
|
11
|
.645
|
128
|
52
|
14
|
8
|
.633
|
.700
|
|
Spahn
|
1957
|
21
|
11
|
.656
|
111
|
78
|
11
|
13
|
.472
|
.792
|
|
Spahn
|
1958
|
22
|
11
|
.667
|
150
|
76
|
15
|
11
|
.564
|
.815
|
|
Spahn
|
1959
|
21
|
15
|
.583
|
143
|
70
|
13
|
11
|
.555
|
.748
|
|
Spahn
|
1960
|
21
|
10
|
.677
|
154
|
74
|
14
|
12
|
.546
|
.859
|
|
Spahn
|
1961
|
21
|
13
|
.618
|
115
|
64
|
11
|
10
|
.520
|
.700
|
|
Spahn
|
1962
|
18
|
14
|
.563
|
118
|
55
|
11
|
8
|
.556
|
.633
|
|
Spahn
|
1963
|
23
|
7
|
.767
|
102
|
49
|
9
|
7
|
.536
|
.559
|
|
Spahn
|
1964
|
6
|
13
|
.316
|
78
|
52
|
7
|
10
|
.416
|
.845
|
|
Spahn
|
1965
|
7
|
16
|
.304
|
90
|
56
|
8
|
10
|
.441
|
.784
|
|
Career
|
|
363
|
245
|
.597
|
|
|
285
|
213
|
.573
|
.855
|
Spahn, with a career record of 363-245, had a strike zone won-lost record of 285-213, a career power index of .855. Spahn’s best strikeout/walk ratio, relative to league norms, came in the season when he had a career-high 19 losses—but then, anyone can see the real 1952 won-lost record is just a fluke. Roger Clemens:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPct
|
P Index
|
|
Clemens
|
1984
|
9
|
4
|
.692
|
126
|
29
|
12
|
5
|
.729
|
1.14
|
|
Clemens
|
1985
|
7
|
5
|
.583
|
74
|
37
|
7
|
6
|
.559
|
1.15
|
|
Clemens
|
1986
|
24
|
4
|
.857
|
238
|
67
|
20
|
10
|
.676
|
1.07
|
|
Clemens
|
1987
|
20
|
9
|
.690
|
256
|
83
|
21
|
12
|
.642
|
1.06
|
|
Clemens
|
1988
|
18
|
12
|
.600
|
291
|
62
|
27
|
10
|
.733
|
1.23
|
|
Clemens
|
1989
|
17
|
11
|
.607
|
230
|
93
|
21
|
14
|
.595
|
1.25
|
|
Clemens
|
1990
|
21
|
6
|
.778
|
209
|
54
|
18
|
8
|
.699
|
1.04
|
|
Clemens
|
1991
|
18
|
10
|
.643
|
241
|
65
|
21
|
10
|
.689
|
1.01
|
|
Clemens
|
1992
|
18
|
11
|
.621
|
208
|
62
|
19
|
9
|
.679
|
1.03
|
|
Clemens
|
1993
|
11
|
14
|
.440
|
160
|
67
|
14
|
9
|
.596
|
1.09
|
|
Clemens
|
1994
|
9
|
7
|
.563
|
168
|
71
|
14
|
9
|
.594
|
1.23
|
|
Clemens
|
1995
|
10
|
5
|
.667
|
132
|
60
|
11
|
8
|
.579
|
1.21
|
|
Clemens
|
1996
|
10
|
13
|
.435
|
257
|
106
|
21
|
14
|
.597
|
1.28
|
|
Clemens
|
1997
|
21
|
7
|
.750
|
292
|
68
|
23
|
10
|
.700
|
1.11
|
|
Clemens
|
1998
|
20
|
6
|
.769
|
271
|
88
|
21
|
13
|
.623
|
1.31
|
|
Clemens
|
1999
|
14
|
10
|
.583
|
163
|
90
|
13
|
12
|
.519
|
1.21
|
|
Clemens
|
2000
|
13
|
8
|
.619
|
188
|
84
|
15
|
11
|
.572
|
1.15
|
|
Clemens
|
2001
|
20
|
3
|
.870
|
213
|
72
|
17
|
11
|
.598
|
1.13
|
|
Clemens
|
2002
|
13
|
6
|
.684
|
192
|
63
|
15
|
10
|
.613
|
1.25
|
|
Clemens
|
2003
|
17
|
9
|
.654
|
190
|
58
|
16
|
9
|
.629
|
1.05
|
|
Clemens
|
2004
|
18
|
4
|
.818
|
218
|
79
|
16
|
12
|
.581
|
1.17
|
|
Clemens
|
2005
|
13
|
8
|
.619
|
185
|
62
|
14
|
9
|
.599
|
1.00
|
|
Clemens
|
2006
|
7
|
6
|
.538
|
102
|
29
|
8
|
4
|
.640
|
.94
|
|
Clemens
|
2007
|
6
|
6
|
.500
|
68
|
31
|
5
|
5
|
.523
|
.89
|
|
Career
|
|
354
|
184
|
.658
|
|
|
389
|
229
|
.630
|
1.13
|
Clemens’ best strike zone won-lost record was in 1988. In this chart we can see, as we can observe in other ways, that in the 1993-1996 period when Clemens had a won-lost log of just 40-39 and was perceived to be no longer a top-flight pitcher, his strike zone winning percentages remained near .600. And Greg Maddux:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPct
|
P Index
|
|
Maddux
|
1986
|
2
|
4
|
.333
|
20
|
11
|
2
|
2
|
.506
|
.956
|
|
Maddux
|
1987
|
6
|
14
|
.300
|
101
|
74
|
8
|
11
|
.435
|
1.111
|
|
Maddux
|
1988
|
18
|
8
|
.692
|
140
|
81
|
12
|
14
|
.476
|
.936
|
|
Maddux
|
1989
|
19
|
12
|
.613
|
135
|
82
|
12
|
13
|
.475
|
.920
|
|
Maddux
|
1990
|
15
|
15
|
.500
|
144
|
71
|
12
|
11
|
.531
|
.892
|
|
Maddux
|
1991
|
15
|
11
|
.577
|
198
|
66
|
17
|
10
|
.621
|
.921
|
|
Maddux
|
1992
|
20
|
11
|
.645
|
199
|
70
|
17
|
11
|
.600
|
.955
|
|
Maddux
|
1993
|
20
|
10
|
.667
|
197
|
52
|
17
|
8
|
.668
|
.838
|
|
Maddux
|
1994
|
16
|
6
|
.727
|
156
|
31
|
12
|
5
|
.720
|
.759
|
|
Maddux
|
1995
|
19
|
2
|
.905
|
181
|
23
|
14
|
3
|
.798
|
.734
|
|
Maddux
|
1996
|
15
|
11
|
.577
|
172
|
28
|
13
|
4
|
.751
|
.621
|
|
Maddux
|
1997
|
19
|
4
|
.826
|
177
|
20
|
13
|
3
|
.817
|
.608
|
|
Maddux
|
1998
|
18
|
9
|
.667
|
204
|
45
|
15
|
7
|
.693
|
.776
|
|
Maddux
|
1999
|
19
|
9
|
.679
|
136
|
37
|
10
|
5
|
.672
|
.620
|
|
Maddux
|
2000
|
19
|
9
|
.679
|
190
|
42
|
14
|
5
|
.720
|
.706
|
|
Maddux
|
2001
|
17
|
11
|
.607
|
173
|
27
|
12
|
4
|
.753
|
.635
|
|
Maddux
|
2002
|
16
|
6
|
.727
|
118
|
45
|
9
|
6
|
.575
|
.685
|
|
Maddux
|
2003
|
16
|
11
|
.593
|
124
|
33
|
9
|
5
|
.652
|
.572
|
|
Maddux
|
2004
|
16
|
11
|
.593
|
151
|
33
|
11
|
5
|
.697
|
.680
|
|
Maddux
|
2005
|
13
|
15
|
.464
|
136
|
36
|
10
|
5
|
.655
|
.633
|
|
Maddux
|
2006
|
15
|
14
|
.517
|
117
|
37
|
9
|
5
|
.615
|
.607
|
|
Maddux
|
2007
|
14
|
11
|
.560
|
104
|
25
|
8
|
4
|
.675
|
.523
|
|
Maddux
|
2008
|
8
|
13
|
.381
|
98
|
30
|
7
|
4
|
.617
|
.527
|
|
Career
|
|
355
|
227
|
.610
|
|
|
263
|
151
|
.635
|
.744
|
Maddux’ strike zone winning percentage peaked in 1997 at .817, when his actual winning percentage was .826. This was the seventh-best Strike Zone Won-Lost percentage of all time, among pitchers pitching 150 or more innings. We’ll run a list of the top seasons at the very end of part 2 of this article.
Maddux, being not a power pitcher, is assigned fewer decisions, and thus has no twenty-win seasons, by this method, but has a better winning percentage than either Spahn or Clemens. Maybe I should do a not-so-good pitcher to balance the scales. Mike Morgan:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPct
|
P Index
|
|
Morgan
|
1978
|
0
|
3
|
.000
|
0
|
8
|
0
|
1
|
.000
|
.898
|
|
Morgan
|
1979
|
2
|
10
|
.167
|
17
|
50
|
2
|
8
|
.200
|
1.092
|
|
Morgan
|
1982
|
7
|
11
|
.389
|
71
|
67
|
7
|
10
|
.416
|
1.057
|
|
Morgan
|
1983
|
0
|
3
|
.000
|
22
|
21
|
2
|
3
|
.404
|
1.110
|
|
Morgan
|
1985
|
1
|
1
|
.500
|
2
|
5
|
0
|
1
|
.202
|
1.412
|
|
Morgan
|
1986
|
11
|
17
|
.393
|
116
|
86
|
10
|
13
|
.442
|
.938
|
|
Morgan
|
1987
|
12
|
17
|
.414
|
85
|
53
|
7
|
8
|
.482
|
.640
|
|
Morgan
|
1988
|
1
|
6
|
.143
|
29
|
23
|
3
|
4
|
.424
|
.785
|
|
Morgan
|
1989
|
8
|
11
|
.421
|
72
|
33
|
6
|
5
|
.546
|
.667
|
|
Morgan
|
1990
|
11
|
15
|
.423
|
106
|
60
|
9
|
9
|
.496
|
.788
|
|
Morgan
|
1991
|
14
|
10
|
.583
|
140
|
61
|
12
|
9
|
.557
|
.809
|
|
Morgan
|
1992
|
16
|
8
|
.667
|
123
|
79
|
11
|
13
|
.451
|
.877
|
|
Morgan
|
1993
|
10
|
15
|
.400
|
111
|
74
|
9
|
12
|
.444
|
.914
|
|
Morgan
|
1994
|
2
|
10
|
.167
|
57
|
35
|
4
|
5
|
.455
|
1.100
|
|
Morgan
|
1995
|
7
|
7
|
.500
|
61
|
34
|
5
|
5
|
.474
|
.666
|
|
Morgan
|
1996
|
6
|
11
|
.353
|
74
|
47
|
5
|
7
|
.436
|
.865
|
|
Morgan
|
1997
|
9
|
12
|
.429
|
103
|
49
|
7
|
7
|
.514
|
.808
|
|
Morgan
|
1998
|
4
|
3
|
.571
|
60
|
39
|
5
|
6
|
.452
|
.774
|
|
Morgan
|
1999
|
13
|
10
|
.565
|
61
|
48
|
5
|
6
|
.431
|
.729
|
|
Morgan
|
2000
|
5
|
5
|
.500
|
56
|
40
|
4
|
5
|
.443
|
.829
|
|
Morgan
|
2001
|
1
|
0
|
1.000
|
24
|
17
|
2
|
3
|
.402
|
1.011
|
|
Morgan
|
2002
|
1
|
1
|
.500
|
13
|
9
|
1
|
1
|
.427
|
.596
|
|
Career
|
|
141
|
186
|
.431
|
|
|
117
|
141
|
.453
|
.838
|
Another star:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power Index
|
|
Koufax
|
1955
|
2
|
2
|
.500
|
30
|
28
|
3
|
4
|
.456
|
1.588
|
|
Koufax
|
1956
|
2
|
4
|
.333
|
30
|
29
|
3
|
4
|
.420
|
1.177
|
|
Koufax
|
1957
|
5
|
4
|
.556
|
122
|
51
|
12
|
8
|
.601
|
1.782
|
|
Koufax
|
1958
|
11
|
11
|
.500
|
131
|
105
|
13
|
16
|
.450
|
1.628
|
|
Koufax
|
1959
|
8
|
6
|
.571
|
173
|
92
|
16
|
14
|
.534
|
1.794
|
|
Koufax
|
1960
|
8
|
13
|
.381
|
197
|
100
|
18
|
16
|
.532
|
1.725
|
|
Koufax
|
1961
|
18
|
13
|
.581
|
269
|
96
|
25
|
15
|
.629
|
1.393
|
|
Koufax
|
1962
|
14
|
7
|
.667
|
216
|
57
|
19
|
9
|
.688
|
1.368
|
|
Koufax
|
1963
|
25
|
5
|
.833
|
306
|
58
|
26
|
9
|
.745
|
1.007
|
|
Koufax
|
1964
|
19
|
5
|
.792
|
223
|
53
|
19
|
10
|
.666
|
1.177
|
|
Koufax
|
1965
|
26
|
8
|
.765
|
382
|
71
|
32
|
12
|
.725
|
1.190
|
|
Koufax
|
1966
|
27
|
9
|
.750
|
317
|
77
|
28
|
14
|
.661
|
1.161
|
|
Career
|
|
165
|
87
|
.655
|
|
|
215
|
131
|
.622
|
1.340
|
Koufax’ .745 Strike Zone Winning Percentage in 1963 was the highest in the majors, and his .725 in 1965 was the highest in the majors. It could be, however, that this understates his contribution, for two reasons. First, he was working a huge number of innings—over 300 a year. And second, since his “power” number was high, he was exercising a great deal of influence over what happened in those innings. There is an argument that the “value” here is measured not by the percentage, but by the separation between Strike Zone Wins and Strike Zone Losses. If we compare Koufax with a pitcher pitching the same number of innings in 1965 but with half the strikeouts and half the walks, we could argue that Koufax was twice as valuable. Not entirely selling out to this argument, but. .. .Koufax’ impact was to move his team 20 games over .500 while he was on the mound, which they were, essentially: We can compare him with Juan Marichal, who had sensational strike zone winning percentages every year, and who had the second-best strike zone winning percentage in the majors in 1965.
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power Index
|
|
Koufax
|
1965
|
26
|
8
|
.765
|
382
|
71
|
32
|
12
|
.725
|
1.190
|
|
Marichal
|
1965
|
22
|
13
|
.629
|
240
|
46
|
20
|
8
|
.719
|
.859
|
In terms of Strike Zone Winning Percentage Marichal was almost the same as Koufax, but, because Marichal was doing this at a lower power level, he was exercising less control over the outcome of the games. Koufax was pushing the team 20 games over .500, and he wound up 18 over. Marichal was pushing his team 12 games over .500, and he wound up 11 over. The meaningful difference is the margin. Clemens in his career was +160 in Strike Zone Wins (389-229) and +170 in actual wins (354-184). Maddux was +112 and +128. Koufax was +84 and +78. Not everybody matches that well.
Another guy who wasn’t great, Pat Rapp:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
Pct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power
|
|
Rapp
|
1992
|
0
|
2
|
.000
|
3
|
6
|
0
|
1
|
.209
|
1.110
|
|
Rapp
|
1993
|
4
|
6
|
.400
|
57
|
39
|
5
|
6
|
.437
|
1.052
|
|
Rapp
|
1994
|
7
|
8
|
.467
|
75
|
69
|
6
|
11
|
.357
|
1.113
|
|
Rapp
|
1995
|
14
|
7
|
.667
|
102
|
76
|
8
|
11
|
.402
|
1.029
|
|
Rapp
|
1996
|
8
|
16
|
.333
|
86
|
91
|
6
|
14
|
.317
|
1.110
|
|
Rapp
|
1997
|
5
|
8
|
.385
|
92
|
72
|
7
|
10
|
.391
|
1.083
|
|
Rapp
|
1998
|
12
|
13
|
.480
|
132
|
107
|
10
|
16
|
.398
|
1.239
|
|
Rapp
|
1999
|
6
|
7
|
.462
|
90
|
69
|
7
|
9
|
.437
|
1.016
|
|
Rapp
|
2000
|
9
|
12
|
.429
|
106
|
83
|
8
|
11
|
.433
|
1.010
|
|
Rapp
|
2001
|
5
|
12
|
.294
|
82
|
71
|
6
|
11
|
.368
|
.917
|
|
Career
|
|
70
|
91
|
.366
|
|
|
64
|
100
|
.390
|
1.065
|
And another guy who was, Tom Seaver:
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power Index
|
|
Seaver
|
1967
|
16
|
13
|
.552
|
170
|
78
|
15
|
14
|
.518
|
1.007
|
|
Seaver
|
1968
|
16
|
12
|
.571
|
205
|
48
|
18
|
9
|
.658
|
.868
|
|
Seaver
|
1969
|
25
|
7
|
.781
|
208
|
82
|
17
|
12
|
.582
|
.977
|
|
Seaver
|
1970
|
18
|
12
|
.600
|
283
|
83
|
24
|
12
|
.674
|
1.102
|
|
Seaver
|
1971
|
20
|
10
|
.667
|
289
|
61
|
27
|
10
|
.731
|
1.144
|
|
Seaver
|
1972
|
21
|
12
|
.636
|
249
|
77
|
22
|
12
|
.647
|
1.169
|
|
Seaver
|
1973
|
19
|
10
|
.655
|
251
|
64
|
23
|
10
|
.707
|
1.019
|
|
Seaver
|
1974
|
11
|
11
|
.500
|
201
|
75
|
20
|
11
|
.647
|
1.154
|
|
Seaver
|
1975
|
22
|
9
|
.710
|
243
|
88
|
24
|
13
|
.655
|
1.180
|
|
Seaver
|
1976
|
14
|
11
|
.560
|
235
|
77
|
24
|
12
|
.666
|
1.184
|
|
Seaver
|
1977
|
21
|
6
|
.778
|
196
|
66
|
18
|
10
|
.647
|
.967
|
|
Seaver
|
1978
|
16
|
14
|
.533
|
226
|
89
|
22
|
14
|
.617
|
1.235
|
|
Seaver
|
1979
|
16
|
6
|
.727
|
131
|
61
|
13
|
10
|
.573
|
.935
|
|
Seaver
|
1980
|
10
|
8
|
.556
|
101
|
59
|
10
|
10
|
.509
|
1.050
|
|
Seaver
|
1981
|
14
|
2
|
.875
|
87
|
66
|
9
|
10
|
.461
|
1.042
|
|
Seaver
|
1982
|
5
|
13
|
.278
|
62
|
44
|
6
|
7
|
.450
|
1.056
|
|
Seaver
|
1983
|
9
|
14
|
.391
|
135
|
86
|
12
|
13
|
.484
|
.981
|
|
Seaver
|
1984
|
15
|
11
|
.577
|
131
|
61
|
13
|
10
|
.571
|
.849
|
|
Seaver
|
1985
|
16
|
11
|
.593
|
134
|
69
|
13
|
10
|
.552
|
.872
|
|
Seaver
|
1986
|
7
|
13
|
.350
|
103
|
56
|
9
|
8
|
.519
|
.870
|
|
Career
|
|
311
|
205
|
.603
|
|
|
337
|
215
|
.611
|
1.038
|
We can see, then, that the strike zone won-lost record is not divorced from reality—rather, that it connects to the pitcher’s performance, that it shows winning pitchers as winners and losing pitchers as losers, generally speaking. This brings us back to Curt Schilling.
|
Pitcher
|
Year
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
SO
|
BB
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power Index
|
|
Schilling
|
1988
|
0
|
3
|
.000
|
4
|
10
|
0
|
2
|
.190
|
1.179
|
|
Schilling
|
1989
|
0
|
1
|
.000
|
6
|
3
|
1
|
0
|
.543
|
1.048
|
|
Schilling
|
1990
|
1
|
2
|
.333
|
32
|
19
|
3
|
3
|
.503
|
1.100
|
|
Schilling
|
1991
|
3
|
5
|
.375
|
71
|
39
|
6
|
6
|
.499
|
1.430
|
|
Schilling
|
1992
|
14
|
11
|
.560
|
147
|
59
|
13
|
10
|
.568
|
.883
|
|
Schilling
|
1993
|
16
|
7
|
.696
|
186
|
57
|
16
|
9
|
.634
|
.946
|
|
Schilling
|
1994
|
2
|
8
|
.200
|
58
|
28
|
5
|
4
|
.515
|
.969
|
|
Schilling
|
1995
|
7
|
5
|
.583
|
114
|
26
|
9
|
4
|
.687
|
.970
|
|
Schilling
|
1996
|
9
|
10
|
.474
|
182
|
50
|
13
|
8
|
.641
|
1.029
|
|
Schilling
|
1997
|
17
|
11
|
.607
|
319
|
58
|
23
|
8
|
.735
|
1.115
|
|
Schilling
|
1998
|
15
|
14
|
.517
|
300
|
61
|
22
|
9
|
.710
|
1.041
|
|
Schilling
|
1999
|
15
|
6
|
.714
|
152
|
44
|
11
|
6
|
.658
|
.861
|
|
Schilling
|
2000
|
11
|
12
|
.478
|
168
|
45
|
12
|
6
|
.680
|
.783
|
|
Schilling
|
2001
|
22
|
6
|
.786
|
293
|
39
|
21
|
6
|
.782
|
.940
|
|
Schilling
|
2002
|
23
|
7
|
.767
|
316
|
33
|
23
|
5
|
.831
|
.974
|
|
Schilling
|
2003
|
8
|
9
|
.471
|
194
|
32
|
14
|
5
|
.752
|
1.009
|
|
Schilling
|
2004
|
21
|
6
|
.778
|
203
|
35
|
16
|
5
|
.750
|
.833
|
|
Schilling
|
2005
|
8
|
8
|
.500
|
87
|
22
|
7
|
4
|
.660
|
1.032
|
|
Schilling
|
2006
|
15
|
7
|
.682
|
183
|
28
|
14
|
4
|
.764
|
.821
|
|
Schilling
|
2007
|
9
|
8
|
.529
|
101
|
23
|
8
|
3
|
.687
|
.660
|
|
Career
|
|
216
|
146
|
.597
|
|
|
237
|
106
|
.690
|
.947
|
Schilling, like most pitchers, has strike zone won-lost records that mirror his actual won-lost records in many seasons—14-11 and 13-10, 16-7 and 16-9, 22-6 and 21-6, 23-7 and 23-5, etc. However, Schilling’s career Strike Zone Winning Percentage, .690, is the best we have seen so far—better than Spahn, Clemens, Maddux, Koufax or Seaver. It’s a whopping .055 better than Greg Maddux’, which was the best we had seen before now.
It is not the greatest of all time. It is the fifth-greatest of all time. And, at +131 wins, Schilling also surpasses any of the other pitchers we have seen in won-loss margin, except Roger Clemens.
These are the top ten pitchers of all time, in terms of career Strike Zone Winning Percentage:
|
First
|
Last
|
W
|
L
|
WPct
|
KZW
|
KZL
|
KZWPCT
|
Power Index
|
|
Dazzy
|
Vance
|
197
|
140
|
.585
|
354
|
149
|
.704
|
1.527
|
|
Cy
|
Young
|
511
|
316
|
.618
|
464
|
203
|
.696
|
.816
|
|
Christy
|
Mathewson
|
373
|
188
|
.665
|
347
|
154
|
.693
|
.942
|
|
Walter
|
Johnson
|
417
|
279
|
.599
|
499
|
222
|
.692
|
1.096
|
|
Curt
|
Schilling
|
216
|
146
|
.597
|
237
|
106
|
.690
|
.947
|
|
Pedro
|
Martinez
|
214
|
99
|
.684
|
242
|
112
|
.683
|
1.145
|
|
Lefty
|
Grove
|
300
|
141
|
.680
|
356
|
166
|
.682
|
1.192
|
|
Dizzy
|
Dean
|
150
|
83
|
.644
|
177
|
84
|
.678
|
1.195
|
|
Deacon
|
Phillippe
|
189
|
109
|
.634
|
140
|
67
|
.677
|
.713
|
|
Carl
|
Hubbell
|
253
|
154
|
.622
|
257
|
123
|
.676
|
.952
|
Any time you’re on a list with Cy Young, Christy Mathewson, Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove and Carl Hubbell, you’re doing OK, unless perhaps it is a graveyard map. All of the top ten are in the Hall of Fame except Schilling and Pedro Martinez, who aren’t eligible, and Deacon Phillippe, who was a very effective pitcher a hundred years ago but with an extremely low Power Index.
The most remarkable strikeout/walk ratios of all time belong to Dazzy Vance. We’ll start with Dazzy when we pick this up tomorrow.