Clemens,Carpenter, or Willis for Cy Young? (edit)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Comparing Tom Arnold to Roger Clemens is "ridiculous?? Really? C'mon, use your imagination!! :lol: :lol:

 

Seriously though,

 

You can make a case that Clemens has been the better pitcher this year.

 

Likewise, I can probably make a case that Carpenter has been the more valuable pitcher this year. Why? Because there's no value in losing, no matter how well you perform. The game is about winning. If your team didn't win, then there's pretty much no value in what you did that day.

 

Which would be more valuable to you:

 

1) A 2005 Lamborghini with no gas in the tank.

 

2) A 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix with a full tank of gas.

 

 

Assume that you had both cars in the driveway for the summer. Both nice cars. The first one is probably the better car, but is pretty worthless (it's not the car's fault that there's no gas in the tank, though).

 

 

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

 

To continue the car analogy, you wouldn't pay more for the Grand Prix than the Lamborghini just because the Grand Prix has a full tank of gas. The Lamborghini itself is better, and that's all it has control over.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Comparing Tom Arnold to Roger Clemens is "ridiculous?? Really? C'mon, use your imagination!! :lol: :lol:

 

Seriously though,

 

You can make a case that Clemens has been the better pitcher this year.

 

Likewise, I can probably make a case that Carpenter has been the more valuable pitcher this year. Why? Because there's no value in losing, no matter how well you perform. The game is about winning. If your team didn't win, then there's pretty much no value in what you did that day.

 

Which would be more valuable to you:

 

1) A 2005 Lamborghini with no gas in the tank.

 

2) A 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix with a full tank of gas.

 

 

Assume that you had both cars in the driveway for the summer. Both nice cars. The first one is probably the better car, but is pretty worthless (it's not the car's fault that there's no gas in the tank, though).

 

 

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

 

I give it to the best pitcher. It's not called the MVP (most valuable pitcher).

[K-Town]

Comparing Tom Arnold to Roger Clemens is "ridiculous?? Really? C'mon, use your imagination!! :lol: :lol:

 

Seriously though,

 

You can make a case that Clemens has been the better pitcher this year.

 

Likewise, I can probably make a case that Carpenter has been the more valuable pitcher this year. Why? Because there's no value in losing, no matter how well you perform. The game is about winning. If your team didn't win, then there's pretty much no value in what you did that day.

 

Which would be more valuable to you:

 

1) A 2005 Lamborghini with no gas in the tank.

 

2) A 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix with a full tank of gas.

 

 

Assume that you had both cars in the driveway for the summer. Both nice cars. The first one is probably the better car, but is pretty worthless (it's not the car's fault that there's no gas in the tank, though).

 

 

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

 

To continue the car analogy, you wouldn't pay more for the Grand Prix than the Lamborghini just because the Grand Prix has a full tank of gas. The Lamborghini itself is better, and that's all it has control over.

 

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

[K-Town]

Comparing Tom Arnold to Roger Clemens is "ridiculous?? Really? C'mon, use your imagination!! :lol: :lol:

 

Seriously though,

 

You can make a case that Clemens has been the better pitcher this year.

 

Likewise, I can probably make a case that Carpenter has been the more valuable pitcher this year. Why? Because there's no value in losing, no matter how well you perform. The game is about winning. If your team didn't win, then there's pretty much no value in what you did that day.

 

Which would be more valuable to you:

 

1) A 2005 Lamborghini with no gas in the tank.

 

2) A 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix with a full tank of gas.

 

 

Assume that you had both cars in the driveway for the summer. Both nice cars. The first one is probably the better car, but is pretty worthless (it's not the car's fault that there's no gas in the tank, though).

 

 

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

 

I give it to the best pitcher. It's not called the MVP (most valuable pitcher).

 

There you go, then. That's a fair answer.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

[K-Town]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

 

Right. Clemens' trade value is probably through the roof, but his value to his team hasn't been greater than Carpenter.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

I think the Lamborghini is more valuable as well. Gas is expendable. Sooner or later, the Grand Prix will be out of gas as well, so in the long term and in the more prudent view the Lambrghini is still more valuable.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I think Vance makes a great point though. It's not called the Most Valuable Pitcher award. If it was, I think Randy Johnson should have won it last year. He was the only thing that kept the Diamondbacks from basically losing every single game last year.

[TruffleShuffle]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

 

Right. Clemens' trade value is probably through the roof, but his value to his team hasn't been greater than Carpenter.

 

I really don't follow that logic... the Stros have won a number of games that Clemens has pitched because he kept them in the game, even if he didn't necessarily get the win. They also won some of the games that their bullpen blew after Clemens left the game. If Tom Arnold had pitched, the game would have been over after the first inning. That's why, if a team scores 0 runs in 7 innings, it makes a big deal for your starter to at least keep them in it. There's a big difference between the starter giving up 5 runs and giving up 1 run in those 7 innings, because they have a much better chance of winning in the 8th or the 9th.

[Guest]

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

Is there a difference? I don't see how there is one, as there's a direct relationship between how many runs a pitcher prevents and how many games he helps his team win. Given the fact that Clemens' 2005 season will go down as one of the best ever by a pitcher I can't see any way around awarding him the Cy. (Assumng Clemens finishes out the season pitching half as effectively as he has, about the only post-expansion season that stacks up is Pedro's 2000 campaign with the Red Sox.)

[K-Town]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

I think the Lamborghini is more valuable as well. Gas is expendable. Sooner or later, the Grand Prix will be out of gas as well, so in the long term and in the more prudent view the Lambrghini is still more valuable.

 

We're not talking about "long term". We're talking about 1 summer, where you only drive the thing every 5th day.

[K-Town]

I really don't follow that logic... the Stros have won a number of games that Clemens has pitched because he kept them in the game, even if he didn't necessarily get the win. They also won some of the games that their bullpen blew after Clemens left the game. If Tom Arnold had pitched, the game would have been over after the first inning. That's why, if a team scores 0 runs in 7 innings, it makes a big deal for your starter to at least keep them in it. There's a big difference between the starter giving up 5 runs and giving up 1 run in those 7 innings, because they have a much better chance of winning in the 8th or the 9th.

 

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

[K-Town]

So who do you give the Cy Young Award to? The better pitcher, or the more valuable pitcher?

Is there a difference? I don't see how there is one, as there's a direct relationship between how many runs a pitcher prevents and how many games he helps his team win. Given the fact that Clemens' 2005 season will go down as one of the best ever by a pitcher I can't see any way around awarding him the Cy. (Assumng Clemens finishes out the season pitching half as effectively as he has, about the only post-expansion season that stacks up is Pedro's 2000 campaign with the Red Sox.)

 

I think there's a difference between "valuable" and "best", as I've explained a few posts ago. I agree, Clemens is having a terrific season.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

I think the Lamborghini is more valuable as well. Gas is expendable. Sooner or later, the Grand Prix will be out of gas as well, so in the long term and in the more prudent view the Lambrghini is still more valuable.

 

We're not talking about "long term". We're talking about 1 summer, where you only drive the thing every 5th day.

 

I'm still taking the Lamborghini. Even without gas, I can stand beside it and let it be a chick magnet. Sooner or later one of those girls will put gas in it.

 

You're grasping at straws to make your point. There's a case for Carpenter, even if I believe it pales to the case for Clemens at this point, but to bring relativity into the argument doesn't work.

 

Also the car analogy, while funny, isn't really germaine to the discussion. It's not like Clemens is a car with an empty tank...and it isn't like Carp is as worthless as a Grand Prix.

 

A better analogy might be a Lamborghini with a half tank of gas compared to a Firebird or such with a full tank. Even then, though it's a ridiculous comparison.

 

Clemens has pitched better. Most of the numbers bear that out. I'm not saying value to his team has no bearing. It does. But the fact that Carpenter has received more run support and therefore his team has won more games when he has started than Clemens team has when he starts, in no way makes up for the difference in other areas. Ridiculous comparisons will not change that.

 

Sure if I had to get somewhere that day at that moment I'd choose the Grand Prix....but I'm not choosing based on that. I'd still take the Lambourghini and then call a friend and tell him he could borrow it if he'd put some gas in it.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Since we're talking value, just because the Grand Prix has gas doesn't make it more valuable If I'm on the car lot and the dealer is selling a Grand Prix with a full tank of gas or a Lambourghini with no gas, I'd still pay more for the Lamboughini and anyone who wouldn't is freaking stupid Edited August 18, 2005 by vance_the_cubs_fan

[K-Town]

I didn't ask which was "better". I asked which one is more valuable to you.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd take the Lamborghini any day of the week. If you happen to have a spare Lamborghini lying around that has no value to you because it has no gas, then I'll gladly take it off your hands. :wink:

 

I think the Lamborghini is more valuable as well. Gas is expendable. Sooner or later, the Grand Prix will be out of gas as well, so in the long term and in the more prudent view the Lambrghini is still more valuable.

 

We're not talking about "long term". We're talking about 1 summer, where you only drive the thing every 5th day.

 

I'm still taking the Lamborghini. Even without gas, I can stand beside it and let it be a chick magnet. Sooner or later one of those girls will put gas in it.

 

You're grasping at straws to make your point. There's a case for Carpenter, even if I believe it pales to the case for Clemens at this point, but to bring relativity into the argument doesn't work.

 

Also the car analogy, while funny, isn't really germaine to the discussion. It's not like Clemens is a car with an empty tank...and it isn't like Carp is as worthless as a Grand Prix.

 

A better analogy might be a Lamborghini with a half tank of gas compared to a Firebird or such with a full tank. Even then, though it's a ridiculous comparison.

 

Clemens has pitched better. Most of the numbers bear that out. I'm not saying value to his team has no bearing. It does. But the fact that Carpenter has received more run support and therefore his team has won more games when he has started than Clemens team has when he starts, in no way makes up for the difference in other areas. Ridiculous comparisons will not change that.

 

Sure if I had to get somewhere that day at that moment I'd choose the Grand Prix....but I'm not choosing based on that. I'd still take the Lambourghini and then call a friend and tell him he could borrow it if he'd put some gas in it.

 

 

What, you're saying that my 2005 Grand Prix isn't a chick magnet?? :lol: :wink:

[TruffleShuffle]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

Using similar logic, Carpenter has pitched in games the Cards have won 10-3, 7-0, 6-0, 8-0 and 11-3. Since these games were blowouts, a decent AAA pitcher likely could have pitched the Cardinals to victory in all of these games, and therefore Carpenter's stats and 5 wins from those games don't really mean that much.

[SouthSideRyan]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

And 4 of those losses the Astros scored 0 runs. What exactly did you want out of Clemens? A 10 inning (or more) shutout so that the Stros could finally score a run?

[K-Town]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

Using similar logic, Carpenter has pitched in games the Cards have won 10-3, 7-0, 6-0, 8-0 and 11-3. Since these games were blowouts, a decent AAA pitcher likely could have pitched the Cardinals to victory in all of these games, and therefore Carpenter's stats and 5 wins from those games don't really mean that much.

 

Likewise, Clemens has pitched in games that Houston has won 7-0, 9-0, 14-1, and 8-1, so that's almost a wash.

 

If you want to put my logic and your logic together, we're up to 11 games (out of 24 starts) in which Clemens had absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the game. So 13 times this year (out of 120 games), Clemens has helped his team win.

[K-Town]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

And 4 of those losses the Astros scored 0 runs. What exactly did you want out of Clemens? A 10 inning (or more) shutout so that the Stros could finally score a run?

 

Nope. Clemens did all he could. But if your team loses, how much value did you provide your team that day? There's no value in losing.

 

Again, not Clemens' fault, but his team could have gotten the exact same ultimate results if you or I had been pitching that day, so what good did he do them?

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

And 4 of those losses the Astros scored 0 runs. What exactly did you want out of Clemens? A 10 inning (or more) shutout so that the Stros could finally score a run?

 

Nope. Clemens did all he could. But if your team loses, how much value did you provide your team that day? There's no value in losing.

 

Again, not Clemens' fault, but his team could have gotten the exact same ultimate results if you or I had been pitching that day, so what good did he do them?

 

He kept the in the game while you probably can't even make the throw from the mound to the catcher. This whole value argument is really kind of sad. You're reaching pretty far, and it's causing your argument to wear thin.

[1908]

Nope. Clemens did all he could. But if your team loses, how much value did you provide your team that day? There's no value in losing.

 

Again, not Clemens' fault, but his team could have gotten the exact same ultimate results if you or I had been pitching that day, so what good did he do them?

So if a player that goes 1-5 on a team that wins the game has been more valuable to his team than the player that goes 5-5 with 4 HR for the losing side?

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Lets just say Clemens pitches two games. One game he only gives up one run and loses. The next game he only gives up one run and wins. Has his value changed? No, his team is responsible for scoring the runs. So if anything, this is an argument about who's offense has more value to their team.

 

Is Clemens any less valuable when he lost because his TEAM can't score runs?

[XZero771679666304]

By my count, the Astros have only won 2 games all year in whcih Clemens didn't get a decision. I think they've lost 7. In those 7 games, Clemens' value was zilch (no fault of Clemens). The Astros lost the game with Clemens. They could have just as easily lost the game with a no-name Double A pitcher on the mound.

 

And 4 of those losses the Astros scored 0 runs. What exactly did you want out of Clemens? A 10 inning (or more) shutout so that the Stros could finally score a run?

 

Nope. Clemens did all he could. But if your team loses, how much value did you provide your team that day? There's no value in losing.

 

Again, not Clemens' fault, but his team could have gotten the exact same ultimate results if you or I had been pitching that day, so what good did he do them?

 

The Cy Young award is for the best pitcher, not the best pitcher in the context of his team. This isn't the MVP. Who has dominated the opposition with the most consistency? That is your award winner. You can make an argument for how valuable a player is to his team for the MVP, but nowhere in the description f the Cy Young does it say anything about value, just performance. And Roger has performed better than Carpenter.

 

Hypothetically, a great pitcher can make 35 starts for a team with no offense, and go something like 10-15 with a 1.00 ERA and .70 WHIP. Another pitcher can go 25-5 with a 2.50 ERA and 1.20 WHIP for a team that scores him a load of runs. Do you punish the better pitcher because his team can't score? No, you give him the award because he was better.

[gus_dog]

I'll give you this much, K-Town: You ARE persistent! ](*,) :wink: