PDA

View Full Version : Burnett or Hamels



blujaysrock
07-10-2008, 09:36 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/headToHeadResults?statsId1=6314&statsId2=7509&type=pitching comaprison

Ph1lly Diehard
07-10-2008, 10:03 AM
I hope your not trying to compare Hamels to Burnett..

Please, Hamels is so much better then Burnettt it's not even funny.

You must be on drugs to vote for Burnett in this one..

Hamels is what? 25 years old I think. He hasn't even reached his full potential yet, and he is an allstar pitcher and a #1 on almost any team.

PhillyLuver
07-10-2008, 10:39 AM
Hamels, by a mile.

quiksilver2491
07-10-2008, 10:41 AM
Please tell me this is a joke?? To protect Burnett's reputation im not even going to post the stats.

Tragedy
07-10-2008, 11:03 AM
:laugh2:

A guy that has never stayed healthy, and only has good stuff, yet has never put it on the field against a YOUNG lefty (Still cheap as hell) that has the potential (And is fulfilling that potential) to be an ace.

I wonder who I'd take.

Zaunnie
07-10-2008, 11:04 AM
whoever says burnett is better than hamels is one dumb sack of ****

PhillyLuver
07-10-2008, 11:29 AM
:laugh2:

It's good to see that Jays fans can realize that Hamels completely blows Burnett out of the water (well, except that one)

McJoe
07-10-2008, 11:37 AM
dude even the stats YOU showed had Hamels blowing Burnett out of the water...Hamels is an ace and Burnett is just another underachieving pitcher with great stuff like there have been so many of

phillies1980
07-10-2008, 11:45 AM
Hamels vs Lincecum is a legit comparison. (Although Hamels wins that, too.)
Hamels vs Burnett is just plain silly.

ShinobiNYC
07-10-2008, 12:10 PM
Hamels vs Lincecum is a legit comparison. (Although Hamels wins that, too.)
Hamels vs Burnett is just plain silly.

No he doesn't.

JAYZFAN9
07-10-2008, 12:11 PM
burnett is a sack of ****

not a good comparison

chicagowhitesox
07-10-2008, 12:16 PM
Not even close. Burnett. lol jk Hamels.

quiksilver2491
07-10-2008, 04:18 PM
No he doesn't.

I believe he does. The arguement is basically over by just looking at their WHIP's.

blujaysrock
07-10-2008, 04:53 PM
man how do you not compare them, im not talking life time i am talking as of this season, theres only a little difference in the ERA and walks, other than that they are pretty similar,stats wise that is

RedSoxRok34
07-10-2008, 05:10 PM
what a surprise, hamels has every vote except for the one from the guy with "blujaysrock" as his screenname

no comparison. hamels is way better

quiksilver2491
07-10-2008, 05:51 PM
man how do you not compare them, im not talking life time i am talking as of this season, theres only a little difference in the ERA and walks, other than that they are pretty similar,stats wise that is

Your sort of exagerating by saying there is little difference.

139 ERA+>>>>>>>>78 ERA+
.98 WHIP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>1.50 WHIP

Hamels clearly blows Burnett out of the water.

R. Johnson#3
07-10-2008, 06:00 PM
Guys you're forgetting thsat Burnett has all that potential. Burnett wins by a mile...

sanfranfan1210
07-10-2008, 06:59 PM
Hamles

C1Bman88
07-10-2008, 07:17 PM
I believe he does. The arguement is basically over by just looking at their WHIP's.

The argument isn't over by looking just at WHIP.

Hamels' WHIP is lower than Lincecum's because of his BB/9 and because of a ridiculously low .234 BABIP compared to Lincecum's .321 BABIP. An average BABIP for a pitcher ranges between .280-.300. Hamels just has really good defense behind him, and Lincecum's WHIP will drop when some of those plays begin turning into outs.

Hamels' FIP further proves this, with a 3.63 mark instead of the 3.18 he currently owns. Lincecum's is 2.91 instead of the 2.66 ERA he has.

FriarFanatic
07-11-2008, 06:13 PM
hamels by far

Pujolsfan91
07-11-2008, 10:22 PM
Not even close, Hamels.

PhillyUD26
07-14-2008, 12:48 AM
man how do you not compare them, im not talking life time i am talking as of this season, theres only a little difference in the ERA and walks, other than that they are pretty similar,stats wise that is

You are clueless

HighVelocity
07-14-2008, 02:23 AM
Hamels-Younger, has been more consistent, and isn't always on the DL.

Burnett-Hasn't been very consistent and will rarely go a year without some sort of injury.

Def. Hamels

theLgndKllr35
07-14-2008, 12:47 PM
I'd say Lincecum.

Driven
07-14-2008, 02:18 PM
I almost accidentally voted for Burnett. God, I would have looked like an idiot!

Driven
07-14-2008, 02:20 PM
man how do you not compare them, im not talking life time i am talking as of this season, theres only a little difference in the ERA and walks, other than that they are pretty similar,stats wise that is
Are you sure you didn't mean Beckett?

EDIT: lol, the first post has a link to Burnett too.

TmacYao2
07-14-2008, 02:22 PM
Hamels, cause i like the phillies too.

Driven
07-14-2008, 02:23 PM
Hamels, cause i like the phillies too.
Best reasoning yet!

Degz
07-16-2008, 04:07 PM
Hamels :bang:

McJoe
07-16-2008, 04:23 PM
man how do you not compare them, im not talking life time i am talking as of this season, theres only a little difference in the ERA and walks, other than that they are pretty similar,stats wise that is

dude your making us all look bad man...

Burnetts era is literally almost 5 (4.97) and Hamels is at 3.13

Burnetts whip is 1.47 on top of that while Hamels is at a GAWDY 1.02

the only thing they are close in is wins and ks which arent great stats to measure a pitcher by anyway...stop talking before they think Jays fans are like Giants fans (jks :p)

Rochesta
07-18-2008, 06:25 PM
I don't have any stats, but I'd take Burnett over Hamels in a big playoff game. When Burnett is focused and energized he eats opposing batters and their families.

Otherwise, there's no reason why you'd take Burnett over Hamels. I don't know of many people who would build a rotation around Burnett.