Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 66

Thread: Better rotation

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    A place called Paradise
    Posts
    13,849
    vCash
    1500
    and and kendrick better than matsuzaka? not a chance
    Jackie Bradley Junior.... that is all

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    The Underhill's cabana
    Posts
    1,542
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bignick5849 View Post
    More of a deep 1-4 now... after Medlen's injury lol
    Laughing at a kid who may need Tommy John surgery? Stay classy Boston - and enjoy your $170 million third place team.

    As for the original question ... Atlanta's stats have been marginally better than the Phillies' stats so far this year. I know the Phillies just acquired Oswalt, but he isn't the pitcher he once was.
    Last edited by atl_braves_fan; 08-11-2010 at 06:22 PM.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    13,066
    vCash
    1500
    Phillies rotation is better.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    69,978
    vCash
    1500
    Yeah I'd take the Phillies rotation as well.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    115
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    once again the stats say differently. that was not my opinion, that was based on stats. kendrick and lackey have basicalyl the saem stats, except kendrick has a lower whip, which gives him the nod. call it ignorance if you want, but the stats don't lie. Becketts stats get blown out of the water by hamels. Past preformance is not as important as whats going on now, and beckett and lackey suck now. Lackey was not the angels ace, he was there number one. being the best pitcher on a team doesn't mean your an ace. The angels never had an ace, justa collection of solid 2 starters. Lackey would not be an ace on any team in the league, and he'd be a 2 or 3 on most of them. And you say i'm ignorant, but then use a stat like wins which tells very little about how we a pitcher does and more about how his team does. Wins do not make you a good pitcher, as you can simply be on a good team. Lackey is not an ace, beckett is no longer an ace. Say what you want, right now the stats say that the phillies rotation is better

    and by the way, Lackey would be a 3 or worse on the following teams based on current healthy rotations:

    yankees, red sox, rays, rangers, cardinals, angels, phillies, giants, braves, dodgers, mets, padres, reds, white sox and twins. arguements can also be made for teams like the rockies, A's and blue jays

    he would be a 3 starter or worse on almost half the teams in the league, and notice that all the playoof contenders are on their. He's not the red sox number 4 because they are stacked, he's your 4th starter because he is a middle of the pack pitcher
    It's good to see that you have chosen to look at 2/3 of a season to compare a guy of John Lackey's caliber, with his track record, to a guy like Kyle Kendrick. This is also Lackey's first season in Boston and the worst of his long career. When a guy is having his worst year ever, and Kendrick is pitching 1.2 runs per game better than his last full season as a starter, and there stats this year are comparable, that should show you he is significantly better. Lackey has thrown over 1600 innings in his career but you want to judge him on 140 of them. That is the ignorance i was referring to. Same goes to Beckett. These are proven guys. Beckett has pitched bad for not even half a seasons worth of innings, and you forgot he was in the cy young discussion LAST YEAR. That is ignorance. These are guys who WILL bounce back, history tells me that.

    With Hamels you've got a guy whose good, above average but will never be great, and has pitched fairly poorly the last two years with a losing record, and got absolutely bombed in the playoffs. Kendrick is just a bum and will never have the type of seasons that Lackey and Beckett have put together over the course of their career, not even close.

    And my mention of the number of wins Lackey has was just to point to his track record and longevity, but I guess you can only see back the last couple months, or is that too far back for you? You just look at the current stats so it makes me wonder.

    And ya maybe right now this day Lackey would be a number 3 on most teams due to a season below the standard he has set for himself, but looking back to the start of the season every team in the league would have loved to pencil Lackey into the front end of their rotation.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    115
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    sure, i'll just take your word for it because you said so and boston has 4 aces............
    You don't have to take my word for it to see that the four highest scoring teams play in the AL and that the top three all reside in the AL East. Toronto is also in the top ten. That will inflate an era. Your boyfriend Kyle Kendrick has started 3 games against AL teams and is 1-2 with a 5.74 era, not making it out of the fourth twice. Is that good enough or is that still just my word? Or how about that the AL has absolutely dominated interleague play in recent history. Don't just take my word here's some stats:

    Wins by league in interleague play:
    2005: American 136, National 116
    2006: 154-98
    2007: 137-115
    2008: 149-103
    2009: 138-114
    2010: 134-118

    Don't just take my word for it, the AL does have better, higher scoring teams (and a DH) to inflate a pitchers stats. So even though Kendrick has "better stats" than Lackey this year, he really doesn't.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sox1234321 View Post
    It's good to see that you have chosen to look at 2/3 of a season to compare a guy of John Lackey's caliber, with his track record, to a guy like Kyle Kendrick. This is also Lackey's first season in Boston and the worst of his long career. When a guy is having his worst year ever, and Kendrick is pitching 1.2 runs per game better than his last full season as a starter, and there stats this year are comparable, that should show you he is significantly better. Lackey has thrown over 1600 innings in his career but you want to judge him on 140 of them. That is the ignorance i was referring to. Same goes to Beckett. These are proven guys. Beckett has pitched bad for not even half a seasons worth of innings, and you forgot he was in the cy young discussion LAST YEAR. That is ignorance. These are guys who WILL bounce back, history tells me that.

    With Hamels you've got a guy whose good, above average but will never be great, and has pitched fairly poorly the last two years with a losing record, and got absolutely bombed in the playoffs. Kendrick is just a bum and will never have the type of seasons that Lackey and Beckett have put together over the course of their career, not even close.

    And my mention of the number of wins Lackey has was just to point to his track record and longevity, but I guess you can only see back the last couple months, or is that too far back for you? You just look at the current stats so it makes me wonder.

    And ya maybe right now this day Lackey would be a number 3 on most teams due to a season below the standard he has set for himself, but looking back to the start of the season every team in the league would have loved to pencil Lackey into the front end of their rotation.
    except of course for the 14-18 teams i named (who by the way make up the playoff teas and fringe playoff teams) who have at least 2 pitchers better than him. they'd rather pencil him into the middle of their rotation. and this isn't based on his stats now, i've been saying this since the he signed with the sox
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    115
    vCash
    1500
    lackey was widely considered the best free agent starter available, a workhorse, proven pitcher whose era ranged in between 3.02 and 3.83 since 2005. Were also talking about a guy who has pitched well in the postseason and is a fierce competitor. And before this year most of those teams would of loved to have him as theyre number 1 or 2.. im bored so i guess i can humor you with a list of the teams you named... this is as of the start of the season

    yankees-lets see here youve got sabathia ok cool. then you got burnett who blows and pettitte coming off a 4.5 era in 2009. plus you dont know what you're getting from hughes as a starter. verdict- number 2
    red sox- really? we offered him number one money, so we obviously wanted him
    rays- the lowest era of a rays starter last year was 3.94.. higher than lackeys highest since 2004.. even if you assume price to step up, at worst he starts the year as number two
    rangers- this is prior to cliiff lee and the emergence of cj wilson and tommy hunter.. they lost theyre best pitcher from 2009 in kevin millwood and lackey would have been the opening day starter in 2010

    man youre really striking out so far, but no time for delay lets keep tearing your list apart

    cardinals- ok he would have been number 3, you got one
    angels- really? he was there number one last year and would have been again
    phillies-you had halladay coming but hamels was coming off a bad year and lackey would of been number two
    giants-bravo, you got a second one
    braves-had just lost vazquez and didnt know what to expect from hudson, probably their number one but it might have actually been jurrjens after the year he had in 09.. so number one/two
    dodgers- just by the fact that randy wolf was their second best starter last year, it would of been pretty easy to pencil in lackey right after kershaw
    mets- am i missing someone besides johan.. oh **** pelfrey or no wait maine.. number two here
    padres- even though the pitching has been a strength for them this year, last year it was a weakness and he would of been the opening day starter
    reds- cueto has emerged and so has most of the staff, but thats this season.. you really think arroyo or harang would of started opening day over him.. i dont, number one here
    white sox- this is one where the hindsight might actually hurt me, he would of been behind peavy and danks, congrats
    twins- liarano and pavano have been good this year, but not last.. he would of been on the mound opening day if he was a twin
    rockies- would of been number two behind ubaldo
    a's- this is before the emergence of cahill.. i mean they were so desperate they thought ben sheets would be an upgrade.. number one on opening day
    blue jays- they are fresh off trading halladay and theyre second best in 09 was romero and his 4.30 era.. he would have started opening day

    so three of those actually hold up when you dig deeper.. he would of been the number three on three teams cardinals, giants, and white sox and actually boston so four out of 32.. he also would have been the opening day starter for a significant amount of them, not to mention most of the 14 teams not mentioned here... so as much as it pains me to say this, you are just plain wrong

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    69,978
    vCash
    1500
    Just because he would have pitched Opening Day doesn't make him the better pitcher. Teams will typically give the nod to the guy making the big money or with the big name.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    115
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantes4Life View Post
    Just because he would have pitched Opening Day doesn't make him the better pitcher. Teams will typically give the nod to the guy making the big money or with the big name.
    or to who they think is theyre best starter.. nonetheless it is what i meant by saying he would of started opening day

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sox1234321 View Post
    lackey was widely considered the best free agent starter available, a workhorse, proven pitcher whose era ranged in between 3.02 and 3.83 since 2005. Were also talking about a guy who has pitched well in the postseason and is a fierce competitor. And before this year most of those teams would of loved to have him as theyre number 1 or 2.. im bored so i guess i can humor you with a list of the teams you named... this is as of the start of the season

    yankees-lets see here youve got sabathia ok cool. then you got burnett who blows and pettitte coming off a 4.5 era in 2009. plus you dont know what you're getting from hughes as a starter. verdict- number 2
    red sox- really? we offered him number one money, so we obviously wanted him
    rays- the lowest era of a rays starter last year was 3.94.. higher than lackeys highest since 2004.. even if you assume price to step up, at worst he starts the year as number two
    rangers- this is prior to cliiff lee and the emergence of cj wilson and tommy hunter.. they lost theyre best pitcher from 2009 in kevin millwood and lackey would have been the opening day starter in 2010

    man youre really striking out so far, but no time for delay lets keep tearing your list apart

    cardinals- ok he would have been number 3, you got one
    angels- really? he was there number one last year and would have been again
    phillies-you had halladay coming but hamels was coming off a bad year and lackey would of been number two
    giants-bravo, you got a second one
    braves-had just lost vazquez and didnt know what to expect from hudson, probably their number one but it might have actually been jurrjens after the year he had in 09.. so number one/two
    dodgers- just by the fact that randy wolf was their second best starter last year, it would of been pretty easy to pencil in lackey right after kershaw
    mets- am i missing someone besides johan.. oh **** pelfrey or no wait maine.. number two here
    padres- even though the pitching has been a strength for them this year, last year it was a weakness and he would of been the opening day starter
    reds- cueto has emerged and so has most of the staff, but thats this season.. you really think arroyo or harang would of started opening day over him.. i dont, number one here
    white sox- this is one where the hindsight might actually hurt me, he would of been behind peavy and danks, congrats
    twins- liarano and pavano have been good this year, but not last.. he would of been on the mound opening day if he was a twin
    rockies- would of been number two behind ubaldo
    a's- this is before the emergence of cahill.. i mean they were so desperate they thought ben sheets would be an upgrade.. number one on opening day
    blue jays- they are fresh off trading halladay and theyre second best in 09 was romero and his 4.30 era.. he would have started opening day

    so three of those actually hold up when you dig deeper.. he would of been the number three on three teams cardinals, giants, and white sox and actually boston so four out of 32.. he also would have been the opening day starter for a significant amount of them, not to mention most of the 14 teams not mentioned here... so as much as it pains me to say this, you are just plain wrong
    him being the best free agent makes him just that, the best available pitcher. it doesn't mean he's and ace or a number 1 pitcher, it means it was a weak pitching class. i really don't care who wopuld be the opening day starter, i care who is the more talented pitcher. lackey would have been the angels opening day starter because of respect from the angels not talenty. so here is every team and who he would pitch behind with the current rotations they sport when healthy given.


    yankees - sabathia, pettitte
    red sox - lester, buchholz, beckett
    rays - price, garza, sheilds
    jays - i personally would take marcum, but i'll give you this one
    o's - no one

    twins - liriano, pavano
    tigers - verlander
    white sox - burhele, danks,
    Indians - carmona
    royals - grienke

    rangers - lee, wilson, harden (again assuming healthy)
    angels - haren, weaver
    a's - i personally would take anderson and cahill, but this one sup for debate
    mariners - king felix

    braves - hudson, hanson, lowe
    phillies - halladay, oswalt, hamels
    mets - santana, jon neise (pitching better than lackey now), dickey......... just kidding about dickey
    marlins - josh johnson
    nationals - maybe strassburg, but i'll give you this one

    reds - cueto, volquez
    cardinals - carpenter, wainwright
    cubs - no one
    astros - no one
    pirates - no one
    brewers - Gallardo

    giants - lincecum, zito, cain,
    padres - latos, garland
    dodgers - kershaw, billingsly
    diamondbacks - no one
    rockies - Jimenez

    so he would be the one for no more than 7 teams, 3 of which reside in the weak NL central that you use to make oswalt inferior. Like i say, lackey is a solid starter, but he is a 2 to 3 starter. he a good pitcher, but he's not an ace and he's not really a number 1
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    69,978
    vCash
    1500
    Seriously, if there are 30 pitchers better than you in baseball then you're not an ace.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    115
    vCash
    1500
    I was using the opening day starter reference to say that he would of been considered that teams number one at the beginning of the season. And he is better than Kyle Kendrick, which was the original debate. I think I have made that pretty clear. Giving Boston the better rotation top to bottom.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sox1234321 View Post
    I was using the opening day starter reference to say that he would of been considered that teams number one at the beginning of the season. And he is better than Kyle Kendrick, which was the original debate. I think I have made that pretty clear. Giving Boston the better rotation top to bottom.
    lackey vs. kendrick career, yes lackey is better. right now the are basically the same. i'll give you the red sox being equal to the phillies at best, but they are not far and away better as you have been saying
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    172
    vCash
    1500
    The Giants win this thread.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •