 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
The article does not state when Game Score was developed. There are a lot of retroactive stats listed, but how long has Game Score been in use by statisticians, team management, and/or journalists/historians? --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 06:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Perfect games, & lowest game scores by a winning pitcher
editIt might be interesting to see the game scores for perfect games that have been pitched, as well as the lowest game scores that have been achieved by pitchers who nevertheless got credit for the win. Also, what has been the biggest negative disparity, i.e., which losing pitcher has had the highest game score compared to the winning pitcher? 108.246.206.139 (talk) 06:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
This article has a statement which is no longer accurate. The article states that Matt Harvey's 97 is the highest in MLB history in a non-complete game. Tonight on 5/13, Corey Kluber of the Cleveland Indians threw a 98 in 8 innings; he was pulled for the 9th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.79.97 (talk) 01:29, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Is the Game Score 2.0 formula incorrect?
editAccording to FanGraphs, there is a constant used in the equation that is determined each season, rather than the base of 40 that this Wikipedia page shows. So it seems like this formula is incorrect if it just says to use a base of 40. JohnJSal (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
- Better question: Is Game Score 2.0 notable? It's currently cited to just the creator of GS2.0 himself, not secondary sources. I see very little coverage of it on Google. Looks like one person's hobby, not a notable topic to cover. SnowFire (talk) 00:44, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
OR Template
editI added an original research template to the section on Maximum Scores because it doesn't cite any sources and seems like someone just did the calculations themselves and wrote it up. Of course, I could be wrong, and the numbers are correct, but it ought to be sourced. I also rearranged the structure of the article somewhat; I think it makes more sense this way. Hatman31 (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)