The Win is NOT Dead

In the November 30, 2009 issue of Sports Illustrated was an article entitled Geek Chorus that had a picture of the long-haired Tim Lincecum inside of a time machine type contraption.

In the article the writer (Joe Posnanski) says, and I quote: Lincecum proves that other numbers better assess a pitcher's value and so the win is dead.

But in actuality it takes a whole team to get a "win." The pitcher does his job simply by keeping his team in the game. And when his team is scoring 1 or 2 runs (every time a particular pitcher is on the mound, i.e., Matt Cain as well as the aforementioned Lincecum) it makes the pitcher's efforts that much more impressive.

In cases when you lose 2-1 or 1-0, too much emphasis is put on the loss. Because you cannot win unless your team scores runs AND if you are a starter you must complete at least 5 innings.

Wins will always be important because that is what it takes to get your team into the post-season and if you win -at the right time- it captures the World Series title.

How about the statistic of how the team fares even if the starter wasn't the one who was credited with the win?

Or the blown save?

Putting things in the proper perspective you can see that the win is NOT dead but it can be a little overrated.

Kevin J. Marquez