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

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

You didn't answer my question of how 4 Cards pitchers have more wins than Clemens and Marquis only have 1 less win than Roger?

 

There has to be a reason behind that.

 

The same reason Oswalt has been more successful than Clemens this year.......because those pitchers held the opponent to fewer runs than the opponent scored in those games.

 

 

Now I have a question for you:

 

If Clemens is getting 3.6 runs per game, but giving up 1.5 runs per game, then why is he winning fewer than half of his games?

 

A quick perusal of the game log will answer some of that. In one game, the Astros scored 9 runs and another game they scored 14 runs. Those outbursts will have an effect over the averages.

 

Also, looking over that game log reveals how many times Clemens lost a start when allowing one or even no runs while he was in the game. It's ridiculous. I'm no fan of Clemens, but what he has done this season has earned him the Cy Young and I won't fault him based on the fact that the offense wouldn't show up when he was pitching.

 

Carpenter has put together a Cy Young caliber season, but he hasn't pitched as effectively as Clemens. I refuse to base the award on wins as they are a team dependent stat. Considering the miniscule ERA that Clemens has maintained, I think it would be a travesty to give the award to anyone else.

[K-Town]

You didn't answer my question of how 4 Cards pitchers have more wins than Clemens and Marquis only have 1 less win than Roger?

 

There has to be a reason behind that.

 

The same reason Oswalt has been more successful than Clemens this year.......because those pitchers held the opponent to fewer runs than the opponent scored in those games.

 

 

Now I have a question for you:

 

If Clemens is getting 3.6 runs per game, but giving up 1.5 runs per game, then why is he winning fewer than half of his games?

 

A quick perusal of the game log will answer some of that. In one game, the Astros scored 9 runs and another game they scored 14 runs. Those outbursts will have an effect over the averages.

Also, looking over that game log reveals how many times Clemens lost a start when allowing one or even no runs while he was in the game. It's ridiculous. I'm no fan of Clemens, but what he has done this season has earned him the Cy Young and I won't fault him based on the fact that the offense wouldn't show up when he was pitching.

 

What the bolded statement tells me, if I'm understanding you correctly, is that "averages" don't necessarily tell us the whole story. If that's the case, then an Earned Run "Average" doesn't tell us the whole story, either. Carpenter had a horrible outing in April. One game has "skewed" his ERA. Without that one outing, his ERA would be under 2. Should ONE bad game cost him the Cy Young Award?

 

 

 

Carpenter has put together a Cy Young caliber season, but he hasn't pitched as effectively as Clemens. I refuse to base the award on wins as they are a team dependent stat. Considering the miniscule ERA that Clemens has maintained, I think it would be a travesty to give the award to anyone else.

 

 

Based on the criteria that's been set for winning the Cy Young Award (win alot of games, keep your ERA respectable), it wouldn't be a travesty at all.

 

And once again, if you're going to be dazzled by ERA, then be dazzled by Chad Cordero's ERA, not Roger Clemens'. If you're going to give it to the guy with the spectacular ERA, then you've got to give it to Cordero. If you're not going to give it to him because he hasn't pitched the innings that Clemens has, then you have to take it away from Clemens and give it to Carpenter, because Carpenter has pitched more innings than both Clemens AND Cordero. You can't have it both ways.

 

Or, you could just give it to Roger Clemens because he's Roger Clemens, which seems to be the criteria that you're using.

[AC036198]

Clemens. To do what he's done at his age, is unbelivable. He'd have as many wins as Carpenter, maybe even more if he got some more run support.

[K-Town]

Clemens. To do what he's done at his age, is unbelivable. He'd have as many wins as Carpenter, maybe even more if he got some more run support.

 

And Chad Cordero would have more wins than both of them, "if" he had pitched the innings that Clemens is pitching.

[UK1679666180]

You didn't answer my question of how 4 Cards pitchers have more wins than Clemens and Marquis only have 1 less win than Roger?

 

There has to be a reason behind that.

 

The same reason Oswalt has been more successful than Clemens this year.......because those pitchers held the opponent to fewer runs than the opponent scored in those games.

 

 

Now I have a question for you:

 

If Clemens is getting 3.6 runs per game, but giving up 1.5 runs per game, then why is he winning fewer than half of his games?

 

Well, there's a thing called variation.

 

I'll break down the starts of Carpenter and Clemens...

 

Just to prove how incorrect your argument is trying to defend one of the players you root for, which I think is the only reason behind your argument (being biased). The only reasons why someone would choose Carp. over Clemens, biased and incorrect logic. If you're biased you'll use incorrect logic and if you're not biased you're still using incorrect logic.

 

Back to variation...

 

Variation tells me that Clemens 15 starts where he rec'd 2 runs or less during the time he was out there.

 

It also tells me that there 9 times when he had 0% chance of getting of the win, b/c the offense scored 0 runs while he was pitching.

 

Also, he had 4 wins he was in line for, but the BP cost him.

 

That leaves 13 wins he had no chance for b/c of the offense and BP.

 

Carpenter had 8 starts of 2 runs or less.

 

There was also 3 times when the offense no chance to win b/c they did not score while he was out on the mound.

 

The bullpen has not blown an opportunity for Carpenter to pick up a win.

 

There you have it, the reasoning for the win differential..

 

It doesn't get any clearer than that, use a team stat for an individual award and it'll get shot down.

 

Carpenter has more wins, b/c his team put him in a better chance to win much more often than Clemens.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

 

 

Carpenter has put together a Cy Young caliber season, but he hasn't pitched as effectively as Clemens. I refuse to base the award on wins as they are a team dependent stat. Considering the miniscule ERA that Clemens has maintained, I think it would be a travesty to give the award to anyone else.

 

 

Based on the criteria that's been set for winning the Cy Young Award (win alot of games, keep your ERA respectable), it wouldn't be a travesty at all.

 

And once again, if you're going to be dazzled by ERA, then be dazzled by Chad Cordero's ERA, not Roger Clemens'. If you're going to give it to the guy with the spectacular ERA, then you've got to give it to Cordero. If you're not going to give it to him because he hasn't pitched the innings that Clemens has, then you have to take it away from Clemens and give it to Carpenter, because Carpenter has pitched more innings than both Clemens AND Cordero. You can't have it both ways.

 

Or, you could just give it to Roger Clemens because he's Roger Clemens, which seems to be the criteria that you're using.

 

There's a huge difference in a starter's ERA and that of a one inning closer. If you can't understand that, we really have nothing left to discuss. My guess is that you understand that completely well and just bring it up to try to derail the point that Clemens ERA for a starter is something that indicates one of the greater pitching performances of this half-century.

 

The fact is, I don't find your arguments too compelling. Closers and starters are different animals. The fact that Carpenter has pitched more innings than Clemens isn't that big a deal to me.

 

Clemens has pitched 184.1 IP over 27 starts or 6.8 innings per start.

Carpenter has pitched 204 IP over 27 starts or 7.5 innings per start.

 

Carpenter is pitching roughly an inning more per game than Clemens.

 

On the other hand, Cordero has only pitched 66.1 IP, in 64 games so barely an inning per game. Not anything close to Clemens or Carpenter. It's an entirely different animal.

 

So, yes I can discount what Cordero has done without immediately deferring to Carpenter. It's not a "double standard" as you imply.

[K-Town]

 

 

 

Carpenter has put together a Cy Young caliber season, but he hasn't pitched as effectively as Clemens. I refuse to base the award on wins as they are a team dependent stat. Considering the miniscule ERA that Clemens has maintained, I think it would be a travesty to give the award to anyone else.

 

 

Based on the criteria that's been set for winning the Cy Young Award (win alot of games, keep your ERA respectable), it wouldn't be a travesty at all.

 

And once again, if you're going to be dazzled by ERA, then be dazzled by Chad Cordero's ERA, not Roger Clemens'. If you're going to give it to the guy with the spectacular ERA, then you've got to give it to Cordero. If you're not going to give it to him because he hasn't pitched the innings that Clemens has, then you have to take it away from Clemens and give it to Carpenter, because Carpenter has pitched more innings than both Clemens AND Cordero. You can't have it both ways.

 

Or, you could just give it to Roger Clemens because he's Roger Clemens, which seems to be the criteria that you're using.

 

There's a huge difference in a starter's ERA and that of a one inning closer. If you can't understand that, we really have nothing left to discuss. My guess is that you understand that completely well and just bring it up to try to derail the point that Clemens ERA for a starter is something that indicates one of the greater pitching performances of this half-century.

 

The fact is, I don't find your arguments too compelling. Closers and starters are different animals. The fact that Carpenter has pitched more innings than Clemens isn't that big a deal to me.

 

Clemens has pitched 184.1 IP over 27 starts or 6.8 innings per start.

Carpenter has pitched 204 IP over 27 starts or 7.5 innings per start.

 

Carpenter is pitching roughly an inning more per game than Clemens.

 

On the other hand, Cordero has only pitched 66.1 IP, in 64 games so barely an inning per game. Not anything close to Clemens or Carpenter. It's an entirely different animal.

 

So, yes I can discount what Cordero has done without immediately deferring to Carpenter. It's not a "double standard" as you imply.

 

To me it is a double standard. It's not like relief pitchers haven't won the award before.

 

So you're willing to discount the extra 20 or 30 innings extra that Carpenter will likely pitch this year, that Clemens isn't pitching? That's about 4 or 5 extra games that Carpenter will have pitched. You're willing to ignore that, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that Carpenter got shelled back in April??

[UK1679666180]

So you're willing to discount the extra 20 or 30 innings extra that Carpenter will likely pitch this year, that Clemens isn't pitching? That's about 4 or 5 extra games that Carpenter will have pitched. You're willing to ignore that, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that Carpenter got shelled back in April??

 

If that 20-30 innings would make up the statistical difference, I would as well.

 

But, Clemens still has a higher VORP and pitching runs above avg. despite the drop in IP.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

 

 

Carpenter has put together a Cy Young caliber season, but he hasn't pitched as effectively as Clemens. I refuse to base the award on wins as they are a team dependent stat. Considering the miniscule ERA that Clemens has maintained, I think it would be a travesty to give the award to anyone else.

 

 

Based on the criteria that's been set for winning the Cy Young Award (win alot of games, keep your ERA respectable), it wouldn't be a travesty at all.

 

And once again, if you're going to be dazzled by ERA, then be dazzled by Chad Cordero's ERA, not Roger Clemens'. If you're going to give it to the guy with the spectacular ERA, then you've got to give it to Cordero. If you're not going to give it to him because he hasn't pitched the innings that Clemens has, then you have to take it away from Clemens and give it to Carpenter, because Carpenter has pitched more innings than both Clemens AND Cordero. You can't have it both ways.

 

Or, you could just give it to Roger Clemens because he's Roger Clemens, which seems to be the criteria that you're using.

 

There's a huge difference in a starter's ERA and that of a one inning closer. If you can't understand that, we really have nothing left to discuss. My guess is that you understand that completely well and just bring it up to try to derail the point that Clemens ERA for a starter is something that indicates one of the greater pitching performances of this half-century.

 

The fact is, I don't find your arguments too compelling. Closers and starters are different animals. The fact that Carpenter has pitched more innings than Clemens isn't that big a deal to me.

 

Clemens has pitched 184.1 IP over 27 starts or 6.8 innings per start.

Carpenter has pitched 204 IP over 27 starts or 7.5 innings per start.

 

Carpenter is pitching roughly an inning more per game than Clemens.

 

On the other hand, Cordero has only pitched 66.1 IP, in 64 games so barely an inning per game. Not anything close to Clemens or Carpenter. It's an entirely different animal.

 

So, yes I can discount what Cordero has done without immediately deferring to Carpenter. It's not a "double standard" as you imply.

 

To me it is a double standard. It's not like relief pitchers haven't won the award before.

 

So you're willing to discount the extra 20 or 30 innings extra that Carpenter will likely pitch this year, that Clemens isn't pitching? That's about 4 or 5 extra games that Carpenter will have pitched. You're willing to ignore that, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that Carpenter got shelled back in April??

 

Are you seriously trying to compare one starter pitching 20-30 innings more than another to a starter pitching 3+ times as many innings as a reliever?

[K-Town]

So you're willing to discount the extra 20 or 30 innings extra that Carpenter will likely pitch this year, that Clemens isn't pitching? That's about 4 or 5 extra games that Carpenter will have pitched. You're willing to ignore that, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that Carpenter got shelled back in April??

 

If that 20-30 innings would make up the statistical difference, I would as well.

 

But, Clemens still has a higher VORP and pitching runs above avg. despite the drop in IP.

 

So what? So you think it's as simple as giving the Cy Young Award to the guy with the best VORP every year? If it's that simple, then we won't be needing voters anymore.

 

So you're willing to ignore the extra 4 or 5 games that Carpenter has pitched, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that didn't go so well back in April (we're talking about APRIL!!......... over the last 15 starts or so, Carpenter has actually been better than Clemens, I think).

[K-Town]

Are you seriously trying to compare one starter pitching 20-30 innings more than another to a starter pitching 3+ times as many innings as a reliever?

 

When you're talking about averages (earned run "average"), then what difference does it make? In one regard, it's harder for Cordero to keep his ERA that low, because he's out there every other day, and one or two bad outings will send his ERA through the roof.

[UK1679666180]

So you're willing to discount the extra 20 or 30 innings extra that Carpenter will likely pitch this year, that Clemens isn't pitching? That's about 4 or 5 extra games that Carpenter will have pitched. You're willing to ignore that, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that Carpenter got shelled back in April??

 

If that 20-30 innings would make up the statistical difference, I would as well.

 

But, Clemens still has a higher VORP and pitching runs above avg. despite the drop in IP.

 

So what? So you think it's as simple as giving the Cy Young Award to the guy with the best VORP every year? If it's that simple, then we won't be needing voters anymore.

 

So you're willing to ignore the extra 4 or 5 games that Carpenter has pitched, but you won't ignore the 3.1 innings that didn't go so well back in April (we're talking about APRIL!!......... over the last 15 starts or so, Carpenter has actually been better than Clemens, I think).

 

I wish it was that simple, it would be a hell of alot more accurate judging everything by VORP than something as dumb as wins for a pitcher or avg. and RBI for a hitter.

 

I wish there wasn't any voters, they've been wrong more than enough times to question their validity, including selecting Clemens as Cy Young winner last year.

 

Sure, I'm willing to ignore the inning difference b/c it doesn't make up the difference statistically between Clemens and Carpenter. The only way Clemens can have a higher a VORP/PRAA despite the 19 innings

.1 difference (or just under 3 starts, not 4 or 5) is being that much better during his time frame. Clemens has a clear advantage in VORP and PRAA which tells me he has been more than slightly better than Carpenter.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm just going to say that I'm done with this argument until the season is over. Based on ALL the data that we have right now, I find it clear that Clemens is the rightful winner. (I'm not at all convinced the voters will agree, but that's besides the point.)

 

I think the stats bear out that Clemens has pitched over the course of the season better than Carpenter, despitenthe fact that Carpenter has pitched superbly.

 

I'm no longer going to be diverted to arguments about closer's ERA. Those who argue such are either being dense, difficult, or trying to derail an argument to take attention away from the real issues.

 

Finally, I want to say that I derive no joy from arguing for Clemens. I hate both the Astros and Cardinals equally. If I were voting on bias alone, I'd pick Willis, but my baseball intelligence and integrity will not let me sway from the opinion that Clemens has been the best pitcher in the NL for this season and such deserves the Cy.

 

Do not take my lack of response henceforth to be concession, simply a respite until the season is over when I then will evaluate all the data and re-enter the debate.

[UK1679666180]

Also, VORP and PRAA doesn't ignore that 20 IP difference it is an accumulative stat. If Clemens had those additional 20 innings of a greater production his VORP and PRAA would be that much greater than it already is. If Clemens had 20 less ininngs than he already has, it likely be closer to Carpenter's current VORP and PRAA. What dictated the the flucuation? Innings pitched.

 

Yet, you're trying to say "why don't we ignore the poor outing by Carpenter?)

 

I'm done with this argument as well, technically it is an opinionated answer stating Clemens has been the best pitcher in MLB, statistically it is a fact who the best pitcher is.

[K-Town]

I wish it was that simple, it would be a hell of alot more accurate judging everything by VORP than something as dumb as wins for a pitcher or avg. and RBI for a hitter.

 

I wish there wasn't any voters, they've been wrong more than enough times to question their validity, including selecting Clemens as Cy Young winner last year.

 

Sure, I'm willing to ignore the inning difference b/c it doesn't make up the difference statistically between Clemens and Carpenter. The only way Clemens can have a higher a VORP/PRAA despite the 19 innings

.1 difference (or just under 3 starts, not 4 or 5) is being that much better during his time frame. Clemens has a clear advantage in VORP and PRAA which tells me he has been more than slightly better than Carpenter.

 

I'm "projecting", that's how I come up with 4 or 5 games, and not just 3.

 

If you're going to ignore the extra 4 or 5 games, then ignore the 3.1 innings, and 8 earned runs, too. Otherwise, that ONE GAME is going to go a long way toward making up your mind, even though Carpenter will have pitched an extra 4 or 5 games.

 

Suppose Carpenter had given up 16 runs in that one game (3.1 innings), rather than spreading them out over the rest of the year? His ERA for every start EXCEPT THAT ONE would be near what Clemens is doing, but since his overall numbers would be the same (because of the bad 3.1 innings) would still have you saying Clemens is "more than slightly better".

 

Does VORP take into account how Carpenter may have pitched if he'd been locked in tight games all year, like Clemens has been? Does it take into consideration that Carpenter might have not been as aggressive with a 1-0 lead as he has been with a 4-1 lead? You and I both know that pitchers are likely to pitch differently in different situations.

[K-Town]

I'm just going to say that I'm done with this argument until the season is over. Based on ALL the data that we have right now, I find it clear that Clemens is the rightful winner. (I'm not at all convinced the voters will agree, but that's besides the point.)

 

I think the stats bear out that Clemens has pitched over the course of the season better than Carpenter, despitenthe fact that Carpenter has pitched superbly.

 

I'm no longer going to be diverted to arguments about closer's ERA. Those who argue such are either being dense, difficult, or trying to derail an argument to take attention away from the real issues.

 

Finally, I want to say that I derive no joy from arguing for Clemens. I hate both the Astros and Cardinals equally. If I were voting on bias alone, I'd pick Willis, but my baseball intelligence and integrity will not let me sway from the opinion that Clemens has been the best pitcher in the NL for this season and such deserves the Cy.

Do not take my lack of response henceforth to be concession, simply a respite until the season is over when I then will evaluate all the data and re-enter the debate.

 

Who ever said that the Cy Young Award should go to the best pitcher? Where did you read that criteria? Because it's clearly not the criteria that's been established. There's also no Cy Young criteria that say that we should ignore relief pitchers. Like I said, you seem to be setting the criteria for the "Vance Award", not the Cy Young Award. Which is fine. You're more than welcome to establish your own award, but let's not confuse it with the stanard that has already been set for the Cy Young Award.

[K-Town]

Also, VORP and PRAA doesn't ignore that 20 IP difference it is an accumulative stat. If Clemens had those additional 20 innings of a greater production his VORP and PRAA would be that much greater than it already is. If Clemens had 20 less ininngs than he already has, it likely be closer to Carpenter's current VORP and PRAA. What dictated the the flucuation? Innings pitched.

 

Yet, you're trying to say "why don't we ignore the poor outing by Carpenter?)

 

I'm done with this argument as well, technically it is an opinionated answer stating Clemens has been the best pitcher in MLB, statistically it is a fact who the best pitcher is.

 

So technically, if Chad Cordero pitched more innings, his "accumulative stats" would put him ahead of Clemens, at some point? So you're punishing him because his manager chooses to not pitch him more innings?

 

 

Accumulated stats don't take game conditions (pitching with a lead, etc.) into account. So even VORP can't tell us who the best pitcher in MLB is.

 

Furthermore, the Cy Young Award doesn't necessarily have anything to do with "who is the best pitcher", as has been established. It's more about which pitcher has helped his team the most. That's Carpenter.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I wish it was that simple, it would be a hell of alot more accurate judging everything by VORP than something as dumb as wins for a pitcher or avg. and RBI for a hitter.

 

I wish there wasn't any voters, they've been wrong more than enough times to question their validity, including selecting Clemens as Cy Young winner last year.

 

Sure, I'm willing to ignore the inning difference b/c it doesn't make up the difference statistically between Clemens and Carpenter. The only way Clemens can have a higher a VORP/PRAA despite the 19 innings

.1 difference (or just under 3 starts, not 4 or 5) is being that much better during his time frame. Clemens has a clear advantage in VORP and PRAA which tells me he has been more than slightly better than Carpenter.

 

I'm "projecting", that's how I come up with 4 or 5 games, and not just 3.

 

If you're going to ignore the extra 4 or 5 games, then ignore the 3.1 innings, and 8 earned runs, too. Otherwise, that ONE GAME is going to go a long way toward making up your mind, even though Carpenter will have pitched an extra 4 or 5 games.

 

Suppose Carpenter had given up 16 runs in that one game (3.1 innings), rather than spreading them out over the rest of the year? His ERA for every start EXCEPT THAT ONE would be near what Clemens is doing, but since his overall numbers would be the same (because of the bad 3.1 innings) would still have you saying Clemens is "more than slightly better".

 

Does VORP take into account how Carpenter may have pitched if he'd been locked in tight games all year, like Clemens has been? Does it take into consideration that Carpenter might have not been as aggressive with a 1-0 lead as he has been with a 4-1 lead? You and I both know that pitchers are likely to pitch differently in different situations.

 

You're running out of straws to grasp man. You just keep going from one sidetrack to the other. The difference in ERA from Clemens to Carpenter is the same difference from A.J. Burnett to Brian Moehler. It's not even close.

[indifferent]

I wish it was that simple, it would be a hell of alot more accurate judging everything by VORP than something as dumb as wins for a pitcher or avg. and RBI for a hitter.

 

I wish there wasn't any voters, they've been wrong more than enough times to question their validity, including selecting Clemens as Cy Young winner last year.

 

Sure, I'm willing to ignore the inning difference b/c it doesn't make up the difference statistically between Clemens and Carpenter. The only way Clemens can have a higher a VORP/PRAA despite the 19 innings

.1 difference (or just under 3 starts, not 4 or 5) is being that much better during his time frame. Clemens has a clear advantage in VORP and PRAA which tells me he has been more than slightly better than Carpenter.

 

I'm "projecting", that's how I come up with 4 or 5 games, and not just 3.

 

If you're going to ignore the extra 4 or 5 games, then ignore the 3.1 innings, and 8 earned runs, too. Otherwise, that ONE GAME is going to go a long way toward making up your mind, even though Carpenter will have pitched an extra 4 or 5 games.

 

Suppose Carpenter had given up 16 runs in that one game (3.1 innings), rather than spreading them out over the rest of the year? His ERA for every start EXCEPT THAT ONE would be near what Clemens is doing, but since his overall numbers would be the same (because of the bad 3.1 innings) would still have you saying Clemens is "more than slightly better".

 

Does VORP take into account how Carpenter may have pitched if he'd been locked in tight games all year, like Clemens has been? Does it take into consideration that Carpenter might have not been as aggressive with a 1-0 lead as he has been with a 4-1 lead? You and I both know that pitchers are likely to pitch differently in different situations.

 

You're running out of straws to grasp man. You just keep going from one sidetrack to the other. The difference in ERA from Clemens to Carpenter is the same difference from A.J. Burnett to Brian Moehler. It's not even close.

 

Hey, Brian Moehler's not been that bad!

[indifferent]

If Clemens gives up 3 or 4 runs in his next couple starts (with his team in a serious playoff hunt), regardless if his ERA is less than Carp's at the end, Carp should get it. Otherwise, right now it's still Clemens.

[K-Town]

You're running out of straws to grasp man. You just keep going from one sidetrack to the other. The difference in ERA from Clemens to Carpenter is the same difference from A.J. Burnett to Brian Moehler. It's not even close.

 

Maybe so, but why is that relevant? Chad Cordero has an equal margin over Roger Clemens. So Cordero is your man?

 

And what to A.J. Burnett or Brian Moehler have to do with the conversation.

 

It's amazing how you're all "right", and I'm wrong, and yet most of the voters are starting to lean toward Carpenter.

[K-Town]

If Clemens gives up 3 or 4 runs in his next couple starts (with his team in a serious playoff hunt), regardless if his ERA is less than Carp's at the end, Carp should get it. Otherwise, right now it's still Clemens.

 

It's probably not, but we'll see.

[treebird]

why dont you make an argument for steve trachsel next ktown? his era is 0.00.

 

this thread is such a complete joke.

[K-Town]

why dont you make an argument for steve trachsel next ktown? his era is 0.00.

 

this thread is such a complete joke.

 

It's a joke, why? You honestly think that the Cy Young is a "no-brainer" this year? If that's true, then Cubs fans are the only ones in America that think that.

[treebird]

why dont you make an argument for steve trachsel next ktown? his era is 0.00.

 

this thread is such a complete joke.

 

It's a joke, why? You honestly think that the Cy Young is a "no-brainer" this year? If that's true, then Cubs fans are the only ones in America that think that.

 

cub fans and people who believe in legitimate statistical analysis beyond wins.