Quiz vs. Sutter, Take 2

One of the problems with being an opinionated researcher is that sometimes you will come across something that contradicts the point you’re trying to prove. But, hey, more than anything, you’ve got to be honest. I’ve put all the reasons why I believe Dan Quisenberry is better than Hall of Famer Bruce Sutter – he allowed fewer runs in a higher scoring league, he pitched better in big games, and I believe he had a higher peak.

That said, there is one area where Sutter was better – dealing with inherited runners. I delved into this, using the new stat I promised yesterday. The results are not exactly what I would have liked, but I think they’re honest. Also, I think we have a whole new reason to appreciate one Mother of a pitcher named Goose.

One of the things I have found frustrating when comparing Dan Quisenberry and Bruce Sutter is dealing with the whole inherited-runners question. Obviously, inherited runners are not too important when talking about closers these days. They generally do their one inning and split. Last year, K-Rod led everyone with 47 saves – he only dealt with 20 inherited runners all year (He allowed eight of them to score, if you care).

But in the Quiz-Sutter days, closers came into emergency situations – remember when they were called “Firemen” on their baseball cards? They were putting out fires, all right. In 1979, for instance, Quiz had a four week span where he came in with the bases loaded five times. It was like that back then. So as I tried to compare Quiz and Sutter, a big piece was missing: How do you measure their performances with inherited runners?

Of course, the easy way to do this is just to see how many runners each inherited and how many scored – this seems to be the common way to measure such things. In this, Sutter looks better. By my count, he allowed just 137 of 445 (30.8 percent), which is outstanding. Quiz, on the other hand, allowed 201 of 523 (38.4 percent).

But just looking at the gross “inherited runners scored” tell much of a story. Where were those runners inherited? How many outs were there? If a reliever strands a runner on first with two outs, well, that counts exactly the same as if he came in with a runner on third and nobody out. And, of course, it isn’t the same at all.

So I took my first stab at creating a new statistic. Now, I suspect that someone else has already come up with the perfect statistic for inherited runs – probably those brilliant folks at Baseball Prospectus – but I wasn’t savvy enough to find it. So I probably “invented” a poorer version of some statistic that already existed … I'm Elisha Gray sending in my patent too late on the telephone. All I ask is that you to cut me a break. I failed accounting.

What I did was this: I took a run matrix – you know, one of those charts that shows you how many runs are expected to score in each situation. There are actually dozens out there -- I tried to pick a matrix that represented the years Quiz and Sutter pitched. I figure the numbers in the matrix itself don’t matter too much, as long as I use the same matrix for both.

With that matrix I came up with how many runs were expected to score every time Quiz and Sutter entered a game. Then, I plugged in how many runs actually scored and figured out how many runs Quiz and Sutter "saved" (I only counted inherited runners – I figured that their ERAs already handled the runs they gave up on their own dime).

So, for example, let’s say that Sutter came into a game with the bases loaded and nobody out. According to my run matrix, in that situation, 2.16 runs are expected to score. If Sutter managed to hold the team scoreless, by my count, he saved the team 2.16 runs. If one runner scored, he saved his team 1.16 runs. If all three runners scored, he cost the team .84 runs. See?

Let’s do an easy one – Mariano Rivera’s 2006 season. Rivera came into the game 11 times last season with runners on base. He had one dreadful outing – bases loaded, two outs, he allowed all three runs to score. By my count, he cost his team 2.25 runs on that day. But he also came in with a runner on first five times, and only once allowed him to score -- which is good. Overall, the system says he saved the Yankees 2.06 runs last year – which isn’t great, but isn’t bad either considering he’s rarely used with runners on base. Those are two saved runs that are not accounted for in his ERA.

So, what does the system say about Sutter and Quiz?

Well, the system shows pretty clearly that Sutter was more effective saving his team – and his teammates – runs.

Inherited Runs Saved (career)
Sutter: 89.5
Quiz: 58.9

Sutter was much more consistent over his career when it came to inherited runners. Quiz had by far the best season saving runs – in fact, his 1980 season could be one of the great relief pitching seasons ever.

Quiz/Sutter’s Top 5 Inherited Runs Saved (seasons)
1. Quiz, 1980, 24.5
2. Sutter, 1979, 14.7
3. Quiz, 1985, 13.1
4. Sutter, 1984, 13.0
5. Sutter, 1978, 12.2

Sutter, as you will see here, was pretty consistent when it came to saving runs, at least until he got to Atlanta in 1985.

Sutter’s IRS year-by-year
1976: 11.6
1977: 9.4
1978: 12.2
1979: 14.7
1980: 7.8
1981: 3.9
1982: 12.0
1983: 4.3
1984: 13.0
1985: -0.7
1986: 0.2
1988: 1.0

Quiz, on the other hand, only had those two great seasons against inherited runners. He had a few good seasons, and he had one awful season. You can see pretty clearly that after 1985, he really wasn’t very good with runners on base (he did have a bit of a renaissance in 1989).

Quiz’s IRS year-by-year
1979: 0.0
1980: 24.5
1981: 7.7
1982: 5.5
1983: 5.8
1984: 5.1
1985: 13.1
1986: 0.4
1987: -8.0
1988: -1.2
1989: 6.3
1990: -0.2

Now, what are the reasons for the difference between Sutter and Quiz? Well, it seems likely that Sutter’s ability to get the strikeout and prevent hits was helpful in stranding runners – let’s give him full credit. But there is something else: Quiz was put in a lot more difficult situations. In Quiz's career, he was inserted with the bases loaded 39 times – Sutter only 17. Quiz came in with runners on first and second 85 times – Sutter 73. In his career, Quiz faced 43 more runners in scoring position, which is actually quite a lot more.

Also late in their careers – when both were showing their age – Quiz was still being asked to put out fires, while Sutter (for the most part) was coming in to start innings. Through their first seven years, they were comparable (Sutter was still better, but not much). After that, Sutter was still pretty good, Quiz was below average.

All of this is not to downplay the findings – the conclusion here is that Quiz was good at keeping inherited runners from scoring, especially in his prime. Sutter was clearly better. I don’t think this makes up the gap – I still think Quiz was a better pitcher overall. But it’s close. And anyway, the point of all this is that Bruce Sutter was elected into the Hall of Fame when nobody even considered Quiz a Hall of Famer – and that’s not right.

Before we move on to something that you folks might care about, there is one more point to be made. This system shows something more significant – Goose Gossage was better than either Quiz or Sutter. He was, in fact, A LOT better than either one of them. Look for yourself.

Inherited Runs Saved
1. Goose: 144.0
2. Sutter: 89.5
3. Quiz: 58.9

Oh man, Goose was incredible with runners on base. According to this system, Gossage saved 58.8 inherited runs just from 1975-78 – and that’s just three seasons because he was a full-time starter in 1976.

Goose Gossage’s IRS year-by-year
1972: 9.1
1973: 3.8
1974: 8.7
1975: 23.8
1976: Starter
1977: 15.0
1978: 20.0
1979: 5.0
1980: 13.0
1981: 7.0
1982: 8.3
1983: 5.1
1984: 3.9
1985: 2.9
1986: 1.2
1987: 0.2
1988: 0.7
1989: 3.0
1991: 4.3
1992: 3.14 (Pi!)
1993: 0.9
1994: 5.0

In his career, Gossage stranded more base runners than either Quiz or Sutter actually had to deal with. Now consider that Gossage’s basic numbers are superior to Sutter’s (50+ more wins, 10 more saves, 600+ more strikes, etc). He had a better peak – Sutter was at his best from 1976-84. Over those nine years, he went 58-60 with 260 saves and a 2.54 ERA. Gossage from 1975-84 (this way we can skip his failed year as a starter) had nine relief pitching years where he went 71-49 with 227 saves and a 2.08 ERA. And Gossage was fabulous in 1985 too.

Then you add the Goose’s amazing performance with inherited runners. I guess it would be worth running this stat on every reliever in baseball history just to see where Goose stands historically but … there’s no way I’m going to do that. Maybe someone can show me how to write a program to do it. And then, maybe somebody has already done it. In any case, if there's one thing I've learned doing all this it is this -- it's time to put Goose into the Hall of Fame.