Ken Davidoff, my least favorite writer in history of writing, (yes even worse than Duggan!) wrote this piece that I read in Newsday yesterday.
From the article:
Underlined one reason why the 2010 Hughes Rules have worked out considerably better than the 2009 Joba Rules:
Well, Ken, here are some stats to show that Phil Hughes has actually pitched much better than Joba Chamberlain and that is the main reason why the Hughes Rules worked out better than the Joba Rules.
13-12: Phil Hughes has 13 quality starts this season. Joba Chamberlain had 12 all of last season.
4.10-4.78: Phil Hughes' 4.10 ERA is obviously much better than Joba Chamberlain's 4.78 ERA last season as a starter.
123-133: Yes, Phil Hughes has less strikeouts this season so far than Joba Chamberlain. By 10. Unless Hughes forgets how to pitch he will pass Joba in yet another category.
48-76: Joba Chamberlain walked 76 batters last season. With six starts left to tie Joba in starts on the season Hughes has 48 walks, 28 less than Joba had. Sure, Hughes could walk 4.6 batters per his next six starts (if he makes six starts) but it's questionable. Not the best stat to help my point, but I doubt Hughes will lose this category.
.250-.274: Phil Hughes' .250 batting average against so far is better than Joba's .274 as a starter last season.
These are only the basic statistics of baseball. Hughes will likely not make the six more starts to tie Joba Chamberlain's 31 starts of 2009, but if he did his numbers would not likely spiral out of control.
There's no such thing as good fortune in baseball. There is such a thing as being a better pitcher. There is also such a thing as winning games. Phil Hughes does that. For that, I appreciate Phil Hughes.