RockRaines Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Plus Santana has been starting full time for about 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Now you are talking about something that has alot to do with the team that they play for. ERA's are about the best statistic that shows how good a pitcher is individually. Cant you just admit that you didnt know what you were talking about and leave it at that? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> True...but WINS are THE most important stat. I'd rather have a 20 game winner with a 4.00 era than a 13 game winner with a 3.00 era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:28 AM) I asked, if you had a WS on the line and had to pick one of these guys to win your game 7, who do you pick? I'd go with MB (or Pedro) (proven CLUTCH pitchers). Pedro huh? I would pick Andy Pettitte over Pedro in any playoff series. Plus he outpitched Mark in the WS Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Johan Santana, Curt Schilling all before Mark. Edited January 26, 2006 by RockRaines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:30 AM) True...but WINS are THE most important stat. I'd rather have a 20 game winner with a 4.00 era than a 13 game winner with a 3.00 era. The guy with 20 wins has those 20 wins because his team has an offense. The guy with 13 wins only has that few because his teams offense sucks. Its not his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Mark Buehrle vs. Roger Clemens. Hmmmm. Let me consider that for a moment. Are you out of your mind? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was referring to Halliday, Peavy, Zambrano, Prior and Santana! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:28 AM) I asked, if you had a WS on the line and had to pick one of these guys to win your game 7, who do you pick? I'd go with MB (or Pedro) (proven CLUTCH pitchers). No, you started this fun thing off by stating that Buehrle is better than all of the above mentioned pitchers. Then you changed it to "I would take Buehrle over (insert pitchers name) or Clemens because Clemens is old" Same story, different thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:30 AM) True...but WINS are THE most important stat. I'd rather have a 20 game winner with a 4.00 era than a 13 game winner with a 3.00 era. Mulder >>> Buehrle Mulder = 88 wins over the past 5 years Buehrle = 81 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I'd take the best pitcher, who is Johan Santana. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Based on what? Santana's vast World Series experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 This discussion is not worth having. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:32 AM) Based on what? Santana's vast World Series experience? Based on every stat possible, and watching them both pitch. Its not Santana's fault he wasn't in the world series or playoffs, its his teams fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 The guy with 20 wins has those 20 wins because his team has an offense. The guy with 13 wins only has that few because his teams offense sucks. Its not his fault. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And they guy with the lower era could have that cuz his team is better defensively and/or cuz he pitches in the NL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:32 AM) Based on what? Santana's vast World Series experience? WTF does World Series experience have to do with being a good pitcher? What the other 24 guys on your team do should not affect your image like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:31 AM) I was referring to Halliday, Peavy, Zambrano, Prior and Santana! At least spell his name right. Halladay. Halladay, Peavy, and Santana are all better pitchers than Mark. In fact, Mark had the worst playoff ERA out of any of the guys on our staff I believe. Oh and to answer your wins question, Santana has more wins over the last 3 years than Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Based on every stat possible, and watching them both pitch. Its not Santana's fault he wasn't in the world series or playoffs, its his teams fault. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You can't say how he'd perform in the playoffs. Look at Barry Bonds...arguably the best player in the last 20 years. Check out his playoff numbers...they suck. One could argue that he's not clutch; that he doesn't perform well under pressure. We cannot make an assumption on Santana either way, because we have yet to see him pitch in a playoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) And they guy with the lower era could have that cuz his team is better defensively and/or cuz he pitches in the NL. Well then how about Santana, who had a lower ERA and more wins than Mark over the past three years? Then would you consider him better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Is Mark Mulder better than Mark Buehrle? Please answer this question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:36 AM) You can't say how he'd perform in the playoffs. Look at Barry Bonds...arguably the best player in the last 20 years. Check out his playoff numbers...they suck. One could argue that he's not clutch; that he doesn't perform well under pressure. We cannot make an assumption on Santana either way, because we have yet to see him pitch in a playoff. So would you rather Timo Perez than Barry Bonds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:33 AM) And they guy with the lower era could have that cuz his team is better defensively and/or cuz he pitches in the NL. come on, stay on your topic. We are talking about Wins, the most important stat, not ERA. Your argument is falling apart at the seams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 WTF does World Series experience have to do with being a good pitcher? What the other 24 guys on your team do should not affect your image like that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> WS experience demonstrates how a pitcher would perform under pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:36 AM) You can't say how he'd perform in the playoffs. Look at Barry Bonds...arguably the best player in the last 20 years. Check out his playoff numbers...they suck. One could argue that he's not clutch; that he doesn't perform well under pressure. We cannot make an assumption on Santana either way, because we have yet to see him pitch in a playoff. What about Barry Bonds performance in the 2002 playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Mark Buehrle or Mark Mulder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:36 AM) We cannot make an assumption on Santana either way, because we have yet to see him pitch in a playoff. And now you've proven yourself to not know a damn thing about baseball. He pitched in the playoffs the year before this 1 start 1 Win 1.29 ERA 7 IP 3 hits 1 ER on a solo hr oh and 9 k's Be gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Is Mark Mulder better than Mark Buehrle? Please answer this question. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mark Mulder is a great pitcher, I'd love to have him on my team. Statistically he's better, so I guess in your book, Mulder's better. There are intangibles that need to be considered that don't necessarily show up on stat sheets. MB is a great defensive pitcher. He's a leader, a great clubhouse guy, and a "stopper". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 What about Barry Bonds performance in the 2002 playoffs? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> CAREER playoff stats!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:41 AM) There are intangibles that need to be considered that don't necessarily show up on stat sheets. MB is a great defensive pitcher. He's a leader, a great clubhouse guy, and a "stopper". Hmm, So how does that make him better than Smoltz, Clemens, Santana, Peavy, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts