Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 118
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    658
    vCash
    1500
    A #1 starter is a pitcher who is capable of being the top pitcher in the league. An ace is a pitcher who is capable of being the top pitcher for their respected teams. Examples: the cardinals have two aces in Wainwright and carpenter Or Zack wheeler has the potential to be a #1 starter one day. A #1 is an ace but an ace isn't technically a #1, Although they could of been at one time.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,053
    vCash
    1500
    Well then a #1 isn't necessarily an ace then by your definition.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wethersfield/Storrs, CT
    Posts
    8,841
    vCash
    1500
    I dont consider Cain an ace. I think hes a great pitcher, but not an ace.

    Don't draw too much from this, but just a funny stat. He and Jon Lester had identical xFIP's in 2012 (3.82), but their seasons were almost polar opposites.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,834
    vCash
    1500
    I always thought an ace and a #1 were the same
    **********

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    18,611
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by YoungStuna28 View Post
    Well that's the way it should be. You always hear prospects being projected to be a #1, #2, #3, etc. not an ace.

    A #1 starter is the Verlander, Price, Felix, Kershaw types. An ace is the best pitcher of the pitching staff or the pitcher that starts on opening day.

    Johan Santana is going to be the ace of the Mets staff next year, but not for his actual pitching ability.
    Both terms mean the same thing actually.

    Its just a matter of how you perceive the definition of each term.

    Ace = #1 starter

    Identical meanings if you want to get literal...so there is no correct answer in terms of how to differentiate these two terms.

    Technically neither of these terms indicate a pitchers quality compared to the rest of the league. Both terms simply indicate the best pitcher on a staff.

    Having said that, I along with the majority of baseball fans IMO view an ace as one of the leagues best starters (however you want to define that is subjective as well). Many people also view a #1 starter in the same light.

    The meanings of these terms are one in the same. The use of these terms have been jumbled together and used in mutliple ways.

    This entire thread is another example of this massive, heaping pile of junk that has become the meanings of these two phrases...which are one in the same...and the same in one.
    Last edited by Wrigheyes4MVP; 01-07-2013 at 04:09 PM.
    DUDA


    Quote Originally Posted by VendettaRed07 View Post
    noah is gonna be a beast man.

    with him and harvey, its like were gonna have Goku and Vegetta in the same rotation

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    658
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jej View Post
    Well then a #1 isn't necessarily an ace then by your definition.
    Did you miss the part where I said,"a #1 is an ace"?

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,053
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BadnewzNiners View Post
    Did you miss the part where I said,"a #1 is an ace"?
    yeah, ya said it, but your explanation didnt match

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    658
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jej View Post
    yeah, ya said it, but your explanation didnt match
    How is A #1 which I said was a pitcher capable of being the top pitcher in the league not an ace who I said was capable of being the top pitcher for his team? If he's the top pitcher for the league how is he not the top pitcher for his team? A #1 is an ace. A ace isn't technically a #1 unless he is one of those top pitchers who is capable of being the top pitcher in the league but they could of been at one point. As a pitcher gets older he loses the stuff that could of made him a #1 but he can still be the ace of his team.
    Last edited by BadnewzNiners; 01-14-2013 at 08:04 PM.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    St. Simon's Island
    Posts
    6,642
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BadnewzNiners View Post
    How is A #1 which I said was a pitcher capable of being the top pitcher in the league not an ace who I said was capable of being the top pitcher for his team? If he's the top pitcher for the league how is he not the top pitcher for his team? A #1 is an ace. A ace isn't technically a #1 unless he is one of those top pitchers who is capable of being the top pitcher in the league but they could of been at one point. As a pitcher gets older he loses the stuff that could of made him a #1 but he can still be the ace of his team.
    You said that a #1 starter is capable of being the best starter in the league, while an ace is capable of being the starter for a team. You said a #1 starter is always an ace, but a pitcher can be the top pitcher in the league and not be the team's number one.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    15,053
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BadnewzNiners View Post
    How is A #1 which I said was a pitcher capable of being the top pitcher in the league not an ace who I said was capable of being the top pitcher for his team? If he's the top pitcher for the league how is he not the top pitcher for his team? A #1 is an ace. A ace isn't technically a #1 unless he is one of those top pitchers who is capable of being the top pitcher in the league but they could of been at one point. As a pitcher gets older he loses the stuff that could of made him a #1 but he can still be the ace of his team.
    If Felix were to be traded to the Dodgers, he would be one of the best in the league, but not best on his team. Thats how.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    11,275
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrigheyes4MVP View Post
    Having said that, I along with the majority of baseball fans IMO view an ace as one of the leagues best starters (however you want to define that is subjective as well).
    Someone should tell the sportswriters who wrote these headlines that they're not using the word "ace" correctly because I'm not sure any of these guys qualify as the "leagues best starters."

    Cleveland Indians Ace Justin Masterson Back to His Old Self
    Brewers ace Gallardo has been at his best
    Scott Baker turning back into Twins' ace
    If new Royals ace James Shields is going to beat the Tigers, he might have to do better against several of their hitters than he has in the past.
    AL West-leading Rangers get Cubs ace Ryan Dempster
    For a while, it looked like Ricky Romero was that starting pitcher. But lately, it's become clear that Brandon Morrow is the new ace of the Blue Jays' pitching staff.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    11,186
    vCash
    2166
    i don't see why people can't use the term "one of the best in the game" or something along that line. People are literally wrong on the definition of the term ace here. People are persistent on using the term "ace" b/c theorectically, the team is putting their best pitcher out there (in terms of matchups) - even if you want to refer back to the term of playing cards. If ace means winning automatically, this is not true in the fact of real life baseball pitcher matchups. The league's best pitcher does not necessarily win against a team's #5 pitcher. so ace should just be the team's best pitcher.

    one the leagues's best pitcher or star player or star pitcher or all-star pitcher or some other term should be used when measuring the calibre of the pitcher in the game.

    The ace of a pitching staff is the #1 starter (or the team's best pitcher)



  13. #103
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,189
    vCash
    1500
    An ace is one of the top 3-5 pitchers in baseball... A #1 pitcher is just the best pitcher on your team.

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BadnewzNiners View Post
    How is A #1 which I said was a pitcher capable of being the top pitcher in the league not an ace who I said was capable of being the top pitcher for his team? If he's the top pitcher for the league how is he not the top pitcher for his team? A #1 is an ace. A ace isn't technically a #1 unless he is one of those top pitchers who is capable of being the top pitcher in the league but they could of been at one point. As a pitcher gets older he loses the stuff that could of made him a #1 but he can still be the ace of his team.
    lets say the 2 nbets pitchers in baseball are on the same team. only one oft hem is an ace with that defineition, despite them both being tops in league
    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. #105
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    384
    vCash
    1500
    An ace is a pitcher who will consistantly put an end to a four game losing streak. They'll put up league leading numbers - the good kind and be counted on to lead by example.
    A #1 pitcher is the best guy in your team's rotation. That does not necessarily make it the same as an ace.
    Technically, a teram can only have 1 #1 pitcher, but a team can have a number of aces.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 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
  •