The Chronicle’s Brian McTaggert gets it right in naming the four best hitters in Stros history:
Jeff Bagwell: The club’s most prolific power hitter is the Astros’ all-time leader in homers (449), RBIs (1,529) and walks (1,401). He won the NL Rookie of the Year in 1991 and the Most Valuable Player in 1994.
Lance Berkman: At 31 years old, the four-time All-Star is in the prime of his career and already has 225 homers and 753 RBIs. He’s currently the club’s all-time leader in slugging percentage (.567) and average (.304).
Craig Biggio: Seven-time All-Star ranks first on many of the club’s career offensive charts, including hits (2,709), at-bats (10,359), runs (1,776), hits (2,930), doubles (637) and total bases (4,514).
Jose Cruz: Perhaps the best Astros hitter not with a last name starting with “B.” Ranks third on career club list in games (1,870), at-bats (6,629), hits (1,937), RBIs (942), steals (288) and first in triples (80).
The following are the top ten Stros hitters of all-time based on how many more runs they created during their respective careers with the Stros than an average National League hitter created during the same time frame (“RCAA,” explained here
But McTaggert does not do nearly as well in rating Stros pitchers, getting just one of the top four all-time correct:
Larry Dierker: Although his career has been over for 30 years, he still ranks first on Astros’ career charts in games started (320), complete games (106), innings pitched (2,294 1/3) and shutouts (25).
Joe Niekro: The knuckleballer who died in October is the club’s all-time leader in victories (144), ranks second in complete games (82), innings (2,270) and shutouts (21) and is third in starts (301).
Roy Oswalt: Still 29 years old, he’s on pace to become the club’s all-time winningest pitcher. With a 98-47 record (.676), he has the highest winning percentage in franchise history of pitchers with 100 or more decisions.
Nolan Ryan: The Texas legend spent one-third of his 27-year career with the Astros and was 106-94 with a 3.13 ERA and threw a no-hitter. He still ranks third in starts (282), innings (1,854 2/3) and is first in strikeouts (1,855).
Oswalt is the best pitcher in Stros history, but of the other three, only Ryan is even in the top 10 Stros pitchers of all-time. The most reliable measure for comparing pitchers is the Lee Sinins-created statistic, runs saved against average (“RSAA,” explained here). Based on how many runs they saved in comparison to an average National League pitcher during the time that they played, the following are the top ten Stros pitchers of all-time along with their RSAA score:
Dierker, Niekro and Ryan were all popular with Stros fans while they played for club, but popularity doesn’t make them among the top four pitchers in Stros history. Dierker was the best manager in Stros history, though.
I prefer measuring runs better than replacement. RCAA or RSAA suggests that a player who is consistently average over fifteen years has no value, when in fact it’s hard to imagine an Astros season that wouldn’t have been improved by adding an average player. Such a measure would promote Ryan and Niekro, and probably also Dierker above someone like Billy Wagner.
Ted, actually both RSAA and RCAA both value an average player because both measures include negative numbers for below-average performance. The fact of the matter is that Ryan, despite all his strikeouts, had only two really good seasons with the Stros (1981 and 87) offset by two really bad ones (1985 and 1988). The rest of his seasons with the Stros were just a bit above-average.
Niekro, as noted earlier here, was actually a below-average pitcher for his career, although the Stros did benefit from having him during the most productive phase of his career. Nonetheless, he only had one really great season with the Stros (1982).
Wagner, on the other hand, had only one bad season with the Stros (2000) and had more seasons with a double-digit RSAA with the Stros than Ryan and Niekro combined.
There are a couple of flaws with RSAA/RCAA. It assumes that a run created/saved in 1968 has the same value as one created/saved in 2006 and that is not really the case. A run in 1968 was worth more than one in 2006. It also overvalues relief pitchers because it’s easier for them to avoid negative RSAAs than it is for starting pitchers.
Gary, you are correct that RCAA/RSAA does not adjust for whether the particular era being compared was pitching-dominated (as in 1968) or hitting-dominated (1996). However, they remain one of the best measures for accurately reflecting the relative dominance of a pitcher or hitter during a particular season or era. Thus, for example, Gibson’s 56 RSAA in 1968 was far better than the next best pitcher in 1968 whereas Hentgen’s 54 RSAA in 1996 was not. Moreover, given that runs remain the most important statistic in baseball regardless of era, my sense is that RCAA and RSAA remain the best comparitive tool of players between eras despite the lack of a “era-balancing” component to the stat.
Your other criticism of RSAA is not accurate. Relief pitchers are no measured any differently than starting pitchers. The measure is the number of runs that the pitcher saves relative to the number of runs that an average pitcher gives up using an equal number of outs. Thus, a relief pitcher’s RSAA may be less or better than a starting pitcher’s RSAA because the reliever generally throws fewer innings. But that doesn’t detract from the usefulness of the measure.
Tom, the problem with using any run based stat like RSAA or ERA is that it is simply easier for a reliever to have a low ERA/RSAA compared to a starter. Last year the avergae NL starter had an ERA of 4.66 while the average NL reliever had an ERA of 4.16. So, when you generate a list using RSAA, it’s going to overrate relievers. Now, I realize that RSAA works differently than ERA, but it still doesn’t make the reliever/starter adjustment.
Gary, by your reasoning, a starter has an artificially high RSAA relative to a reliever simply because he pitches more innings and, thus, has the potential to generate more outs. Stated another way, a reliever’s potential ceiling is lower than a starter’s, but a starter’s cellar is potentially deeper than a reliever’s. While I agree that it makes sense to compare starters against starters and relievers against other relievers generally, I still think RSAA is a sound comparative measure for pitchers generally.