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

[K-Town]

You know what, yep, you win.

 

Chris Carpenter (Or should I call him Christ Carpenter? Is that more fitting?) is the greatest pitcher of all time. The St. Louis Cardinals are the best thing ever to happen to this planet, and anyone who doesn't agree will not make it to heaven. Roger Clemens is a horrible pitcher who doesn't even deserve to catch the home run balls that Carp throws up. You win, congratulations. Lets forget about the previous 30 pages where people consistently proved your stats wrong or meaningless. And we'll just all go back to watching cartoons in my basement while eating Apple Jacks.

 

Your words, not mine. Your martyrdom is charming.

 

And you know what's really funny. Neither your opinion or mine makes any difference. The writers will determine who deserves the Cy Young Award, and I doubt if they'll even CONSIDER your oh-so-important information, or my "meaningless" stats.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You mean like the 9 extra "meaningless" wins?

 

Meaningless is an excellent word for that.

 

You mean like the K/BB ratio?

 

Yep, Carpenter walks fewer guys while K'ing the same amount. Clemens gives up fewer HR. Then again, this is new information that wasn't presented less than 10-15 posts ago.

 

You mean like the fact that Carpenter will have pitched the equivalent of 4 extra games over Clemens this year?

 

And after all these pages, the cumulative stats still favor Clemens despite his lack of innings and your repeated doggedness to this point.

 

You mean the precedent that's been set by the voters over and over again that tells me that Carpenter is a reasonable candidate for the Cy Young Award.

 

And, as was brought up 5 pages ago, this is a discussion over who DESERVES the award, not who ultimately will receive it, deserving or not. I'm not about to re-read the entire thread, but I can virtually guarantee that everyone was saying that Clemens should, not will win the Cy.

[indifferent]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised that I can't recall seeing one Cubs poster back the Carp horse on this one. I could have selective memory.

 

I thought this weekend's match up between the two would lend a little more clarity to the argument, but basically they both gave up two runs. Carp's team came through once Clemens was pulled to give him the run support he's become accustomed to. ERA stayed for the most part the same for both. I'd say Carp notching another win and another complete game gave him a little more support. All in all, it's still anyone's CY to lose and I'm still withholding judgement, although I seem to put more stock in wins than most on this board.

 

What I don't want to see is Clemens getting a few key wins to clinch the wild card for the Stros and have that factor anywhere near the Cy Young decision. IMO that should have no bearing. We're already seeing Jones earn points based on the position his team is in right now and taking away from two deserving candidates in Pujols and Lee.

[K-Town]

You mean like the 9 extra "meaningless" wins?

 

Meaningless is an excellent word for that.

 

You mean like the K/BB ratio?

 

Yep, Carpenter walks fewer guys while K'ing the same amount. Clemens gives up fewer HR. Then again, this is new information that wasn't presented less than 10-15 posts ago.

 

You mean like the fact that Carpenter will have pitched the equivalent of 4 extra games over Clemens this year?

 

And after all these pages, the cumulative stats still favor Clemens despite his lack of innings and your repeated doggedness to this point.

 

You mean the precedent that's been set by the voters over and over again that tells me that Carpenter is a reasonable candidate for the Cy Young Award.

 

And, as was brought up 5 pages ago, this is a discussion over who DESERVES the award, not who ultimately will receive it, deserving or not. I'm not about to re-read the entire thread, but I can virtually guarantee that everyone was saying that Clemens should, not will win the Cy.

 

 

The guy who gets the most votes "should" win, because that's how the system is set up.

 

Fortunately for Carpenter, this thing won't be decided on a Cubs' forum.

 

Fortunately for Clemens, it won't be decided on a Cardinals' forum.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised that I can't recall seeing one Cubs poster back the Carp horse on this one. I could have selective memory.

 

I thought this weekend's match up between the two would lend a little more clarity to the argument, but basically they both gave up two runs. Carp's team came through once Clemens was pulled to give him the run support he's become accustomed to. ERA stayed for the most part the same for both. I'd say Carp notching another win and another complete game gave him a little more support. All in all, it's still anyone's CY to lose and I'm still withholding judgement, although I seem to put more stock in wins than most on this board.

 

What I don't want to see is Clemens getting a few key wins to clinch the wild card for the Stros and have that factor anywhere near the Cy Young decision. IMO that should have no bearing. We're already seeing Jones earn points based on the position his team is in right now and taking away from two deserving candidates in Pujols and Lee.

 

I agree. It's sad that many voters base some of these awards on the team's performance. I think the Cubs being this bad has completely cost Lee any shot at the award. Even though without him, I'm not even sure the Cubs would have 25 wins right now. But sadly, that's the way it goes.

[imb]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised that I can't recall seeing one Cubs poster back the Carp horse on this one. I could have selective memory.

 

I thought this weekend's match up between the two would lend a little more clarity to the argument, but basically they both gave up two runs. Carp's team came through once Clemens was pulled to give him the run support he's become accustomed to. ERA stayed for the most part the same for both. I'd say Carp notching another win and another complete game gave him a little more support. All in all, it's still anyone's CY to lose and I'm still withholding judgement, although I seem to put more stock in wins than most on this board.

 

What I don't want to see is Clemens getting a few key wins to clinch the wild card for the Stros and have that factor anywhere near the Cy Young decision. IMO that should have no bearing. We're already seeing Jones earn points based on the position his team is in right now and taking away from two deserving candidates in Pujols and Lee.

 

As amazing a season as Clemens is having, Carp is right there with him. If he wins the CY Young, it won't be a travesty or anything, a travesty would be Jones winning the MVP.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The guy who gets the most votes "should" win, because that's how the system is set up.

 

Okay, now I'm done.

[gus_dog]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised that I can't recall seeing one Cubs poster back the Carp horse on this one. I could have selective memory.

 

I thought this weekend's match up between the two would lend a little more clarity to the argument, but basically they both gave up two runs. Carp's team came through once Clemens was pulled to give him the run support he's become accustomed to. ERA stayed for the most part the same for both. I'd say Carp notching another win and another complete game gave him a little more support. All in all, it's still anyone's CY to lose and I'm still withholding judgement, although I seem to put more stock in wins than most on this board.

 

What I don't want to see is Clemens getting a few key wins to clinch the wild card for the Stros and have that factor anywhere near the Cy Young decision. IMO that should have no bearing. We're already seeing Jones earn points based on the position his team is in right now and taking away from two deserving candidates in Pujols and Lee.

 

You almost had me, but then why wouldn't some key Wild Card wins count for Clemens? If the wins that Carpenter has are what's putting him up there count (along with his other excellent performance staistics), then Clemen's wins should count as well, no?

 

I really have no problem with either guy winning, because they both are deserving.

 

Like I wrote before, Carpenter will get voted the NL Cy Young award, IMO. Likely not a landslide, but he'll win it.

 

Additionally, Cardinal fans will have the NL MVP to enjoy as well, since I also believe that Pujols will garner that award. Plus, the Cardinals will win the division, and likely win the pennant too.

 

Man, you guys are spoiled. :P

[dalgreen]

As you will quickly find out ,now that you're a Missouri resident, there is a definite "small market" inferiority complex among St. Louis sports fans and media. Flip the script, and give Carpenter Clemens' stats and the team, and give Clemens Carpenter's stats and team and they'd swear Carpenter should win the Cy Young. To me, there are great arguments for both guys, but I hate how in St. Louis there seems to be a great feeling of injustice if Carpenter doesn't win it. I just find it remarkable how any pitcher pitching in Minute Maid half the time can have a below 2.00 ERA. Same thing regarding Pujols vs. Jones vs. Lee for MVP. Joe Buck (whom I generally like) said yesterday he finds the comparisons between Pujols and Jones for MVP, "ridiculous". Why?

 

Really? Have you read my opinions in the "MVP" thread? Not biased toward Pujols, at all. How about the thread titled "Who will win the World Series". My pick? Not the Cardinals, but the Red Sox.

 

Did I campaign for ANY Cardinal to win ANY award last year? No. I believe that Bonds deserved the MVP, and there were no Cardinal pitchers worthy of the Cy Young Award. So you point isn't really valid.

 

If Clemens and Carpenter had their numbers reversed, would I be clamoring for Carpenter as the Cy Young winner? I'm not sure. It's certainly a close enough contest that a little "Redbird bias" can sway me. It's those of you who think it's a "no brainer" for Clemens who are biased. There's a VERY solid case for Carpenter to win, because he has the whole package, not just the ERA title.

 

 

Oh, and Andruw Jones doesn't belong in the MVP conversation with Pujols, and it is pretty much "ridiculous" that he's mentioned.

 

Wow, I didn't expect a StL media member to be on here! :P Let me further explain my points. First, based on the number of Cardinal fans I know and hear, your opinion that Bonds has deserved the last two MVP's is definitely in the minority. Second, the whole argument for Pujols the last two seasons has been, "Is the MVP for the player with the best stats or the player who's most valuable to his team?" That has been the question. Of course, a ton of Cardinal fans and media thought it was who was most valuable to his team, and since the Cards won last year and the Giants didn't , they said it should've gone to Pujols. Now the script is flipped, and, no, Andrew Jones' numbers don't compare to Pujols, but where would the Braves be without Jones considering the Braves injuries? I'm not saying Jones should win the MVP, I'd vote for Pujols, but I'm talking about the automatic dismissal of Lee or Jones winning as ridiculous. It's not. Heck, one could argue that Carpenter is the Cardinals MVP over Pujols. I'm not saying he is, just saying you could make an argument that Carpenter is the team MVP. I can't think of anyone other than Jones who could be the Braves MVP. Again, for those who love to read only what they want to read, if I had a vote, I'd vote Pujols for MVP, and flip a coin between Carpenter and Clemens (unless Clemens is hurt the rest of the year).

[K-Town]

Wow, I didn't expect a StL media member to be on here! :P Let me further explain my points. First, based on the number of Cardinal fans I know and hear, your opinion that Bonds has deserved the last two MVP's is definitely in the minority. Second, the whole argument for Pujols the last two seasons has been, "Is the MVP for the player with the best stats or the player who's most valuable to his team?" That has been the question. Of course, a ton of Cardinal fans and media thought it was who was most valuable to his team, and since the Cards won last year and the Giants didn't , they said it should've gone to Pujols. Now the script is flipped, and, no, Andrew Jones' numbers don't compare to Pujols, but where would the Braves be without Jones considering the Braves injuries? I'm not saying Jones should win the MVP, I'd vote for Pujols, but I'm talking about the automatic dismissal of Lee or Jones winning as ridiculous. It's not. Heck, one could argue that Carpenter is the Cardinals MVP over Pujols. I'm not saying he is, just saying you could make an argument that Carpenter is the team MVP. I can't think of anyone other than Jones who could be the Braves MVP. Again, for those who love to read only what they want to read, if I had a vote, I'd vote Pujols for MVP, and flip a coin between Carpenter and Clemens (unless Clemens is hurt the rest of the year).

 

1) I realize that the majority of Cards fans feel that Pujols has been "robbed" the last couple of years. I disagree. What Bonds did was amazing, and the MVP race was no-contest in his favor, as far as I'm concerned. The MVP isn't "just" about stats, but Bonds was so far and away better than everybody else that it became an easy choice, playoffs or no playoffs.

 

2) I wouldn't dismiss Lee this year AT ALL. He's a worthy candidate. Andruw Jones isn't in the same category as Pujols & Lee when it comes to Win Shares and OPS. A case could be made that Giles and Furcal are as important to the Braves and Andruw is this year.

[indifferent]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised that I can't recall seeing one Cubs poster back the Carp horse on this one. I could have selective memory.

 

I thought this weekend's match up between the two would lend a little more clarity to the argument, but basically they both gave up two runs. Carp's team came through once Clemens was pulled to give him the run support he's become accustomed to. ERA stayed for the most part the same for both. I'd say Carp notching another win and another complete game gave him a little more support. All in all, it's still anyone's CY to lose and I'm still withholding judgement, although I seem to put more stock in wins than most on this board.

 

What I don't want to see is Clemens getting a few key wins to clinch the wild card for the Stros and have that factor anywhere near the Cy Young decision. IMO that should have no bearing. We're already seeing Jones earn points based on the position his team is in right now and taking away from two deserving candidates in Pujols and Lee.

 

You almost had me, but then why wouldn't some key Wild Card wins count for Clemens? If the wins that Carpenter has are what's putting him up there count (along with his other excellent performance staistics), then Clemen's wins should count as well, no?

 

 

Oh, they should count. I meant if Clemens gets a couple of "clutch" wins AND Carp gets a couple more wins through the end of the season, Clemens shouldn't get additional consideration.

 

I'm tiring of ESPN's pandering of the what have you done lately mantra.

 

You can't put an arbitrary label on what "counts" or what's "clutch". Or apparently you can only win the MVP if one plays on a playoff team that barely squeaks in AND you have to get to the playoffs. One also apparently only needs a red hot Sept, regardless of what one does the other five mos. of baseball to help one's team.

 

IMO, the Cy should be less dependent of team stats than the MVP.

[goonys evil twin]

IMO, the Cy should be less dependent of team stats than the MVP.

 

So wins shouldn't matter.

[indifferent]

IMO, the Cy should be less dependent of team stats than the MVP.

 

So wins shouldn't matter.

 

This is a merry go round argument, isn't it? I was hoping not to get sucked in. I already stated I weight wins more heavily than most on this board, but mostly because I think the actual pitching performance within the microcosm of one game factors pretty heavily into whether a pitcher gets a win or not. I don't think ERA tells the entire story.

 

In your opinion, who should win the AL Cy? Colon with his 18 wins and 3.24 ERA or Rivera?

[ConstableRabbit]

IMO, the Cy should be less dependent of team stats than the MVP.

 

So wins shouldn't matter.

 

This is a merry go round argument, isn't it? I was hoping not to get sucked in. I already stated I weight wins more heavily than most on this board, but mostly because I think the actual pitching performance within the microcosm of one game factors pretty heavily into whether a pitcher gets a win or not. I don't think ERA tells the entire story.

 

In your opinion, who should win the AL Cy? Colon with his 18 wins and 3.24 ERA or Rivera?

 

I tend to agree. I mean, I know this has been a topic for discussion in the past, but I think we're looking at wins the wrong way. If I was going to trade for a pitcher or get a free agent, I wouldn't really look at wins at all - I'd look at ERA. See, wins are a team thing, you dont know how a pitcher will pitch on a completely different team based on wins.

However, a pitcher who is on my team who has an ERA of 4.00 who gets 5.00 runs of support per game is more valuable to my team than a pitcher with an ERA of 2.50 who gets 3.00 runs of support per game. However, the former may not be a "better pitcher".

 

So the question is whether the Cy is given to the Most Valuable Pitcher to his team, or the pitcher who has literally "pitched" the best.

[UK1679666180]

In your opinion, who should win the AL Cy? Colon with his 18 wins and 3.24 ERA or Rivera?

 

Santana followed by Halladay and then Colon. That is also factoring the fact that Halladay has been injured and the Twins aren't going to the playoffs. They also have a combined 24 wins this year, yet have been better than Colon.

 

When Alfonseca led the NL in saves was he the best closer or the most opportunistic? I take the same approach to a pitcher and wins.

[K-Town]

I'm just curious, at what point (if any) would any of you consider Carpenter's ERA to be close enough to Clemens, to consider Carpenter for the Cy Young.

 

For instance, if Carpenter goes 23-4, with a 2.1 ERA, and Clemens goes 12-6, with a 1.7 or 1.8 ERA, do you still lean toward Clemens? Is it strictly the best ERA that you're going to use?

 

 

I'm not trying to bait anybody into anything, I'm just curious.

[IlliniAmy]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

[K-Town]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

 

Fight the good fight, Amy. I've done my best, but you'll never get past the ERA thing. :)

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

 

Fight the good fight, Amy. I've done my best, but you'll never get past the ERA thing. :)

 

Not when Clemens' ERA is three quarters of a run better while seemingly every other category (minus wins and IP) is either a draw, or favors Clemens. Then no, you won't get past the ERA thing. I honestly believe that Carpenter is going to win the Cy Young. But this isn't a discussion on who will win it, it's a discussion on who should win it. And there are 32 pages of statistics proving that Clemens is having the better year (minus Carpenter's innings pitched and K Town's conspiracy theories on why Clemens doesn't throw complete games)

 

K-Town: Yes, you are trying to bait people here by saying that. It's like your Prior comment from yesterday. There was absolutely no reason to say it other than to try and get people riled up here, but you said it anyway. Then when you were called on it, you backed down. But back to your question: If the ERA gap is only .3 by the end of the year (that is if Clemens goes up to 1.8 or 1.9 while Carp drops to 2.1), then Carp will probably deserve the award. But there is a huge difference between a .3 gap, and a .75 gap.

[K-Town]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

 

Fight the good fight, Amy. I've done my best, but you'll never get past the ERA thing. :)

 

Not when Clemens' ERA is three quarters of a run better while seemingly every other category (minus wins and IP) is either a draw, or favors Clemens. Then no, you won't get past the ERA thing. I honestly believe that Carpenter is going to win the Cy Young. But this isn't a discussion on who will win it, it's a discussion on who should win it. And there are 32 pages of statistics proving that Clemens is having the better year (minus Carpenter's innings pitched and K Town's conspiracy theories on why Clemens doesn't throw complete games)

 

K-Town: Yes, you are trying to bait people here by saying that. It's like your Prior comment from yesterday. There was absolutely no reason to say it other than to try and get people riled up here, but you said it anyway. Then when you were called on it, you backed down. But back to your question: If the ERA gap is only .3 by the end of the year (that is if Clemens goes up to 1.8 or 1.9 while Carp drops to 2.1), then Carp will probably deserve the award. But there is a huge difference between a .3 gap, and a .75 gap.

 

Settle down, CubbieBlue. The Prior comment was in no way meant to be offensive. Ask any Cardinal fan, and he'll tell you that he (or she, in Amy's case) would LOVE to have Prior. I only used him, because I thought it would be an example that the folks here could relate to. Wouldn't it be great if Prior could pitch deeper into games? Especially with the Cubs' bullpen struggling. That's all I was saying. Don't be so defensive.

 

The difference in ERA is .71. When this thread started 3 weeks ago, the difference was .93. So it's dropped almost a quarter of a run in just 3 weeks.

 

I don't disagree that there's a big difference between a .3 gap, and a .75 gap. That's why I asked the question. I guess we'll see what happens.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

 

Fight the good fight, Amy. I've done my best, but you'll never get past the ERA thing. :)

 

Not when Clemens' ERA is three quarters of a run better while seemingly every other category (minus wins and IP) is either a draw, or favors Clemens. Then no, you won't get past the ERA thing. I honestly believe that Carpenter is going to win the Cy Young. But this isn't a discussion on who will win it, it's a discussion on who should win it. And there are 32 pages of statistics proving that Clemens is having the better year (minus Carpenter's innings pitched and K Town's conspiracy theories on why Clemens doesn't throw complete games)

 

K-Town: Yes, you are trying to bait people here by saying that. It's like your Prior comment from yesterday. There was absolutely no reason to say it other than to try and get people riled up here, but you said it anyway. Then when you were called on it, you backed down. But back to your question: If the ERA gap is only .3 by the end of the year (that is if Clemens goes up to 1.8 or 1.9 while Carp drops to 2.1), then Carp will probably deserve the award. But there is a huge difference between a .3 gap, and a .75 gap.

 

It's more than ERA. Clemens has saved his team more runs over Carpenter this year. UK, do you have the updated numbers?

 

And I agree BCB that he's trying to bait. Not only the Prior comment, but the one about Cubs and wins. He makes them and then retracts once called on it, but it doesn't stop him from making the comments. I think he's just pissed off that we won't fall prostrate and make the sign of the cross in front of the arch and say three hail Carpenter's.

[K-Town]

It's more than ERA. Clemens has saved his team more runs over Carpenter this year. UK, do you have the updated numbers?

 

And I agree BCB that he's trying to bait. Not only the Prior comment, but the one about Cubs and wins. He makes them and then retracts once called on it, but it doesn't stop him from making the comments. I think he's just pissed off that we won't fall prostrate and make the sign of the cross in front of the arch and say three hail Carpenter's.

 

You're more of an expert than I am, so I'll just pose the question: Wouldn't "runs saved" be pretty much directly related to ERA? Or not?

 

Geez...... get over the Prior thing. Prior's awesome. Instead of dealing with the point that I made (that it would be nice if Prior could go deeper into games), you just want to get defensive. I'll use Marquis as an example, if it makes you feel better. For most of this year, he's had no clue how to get into the later innings of a game, and it frustrates the heck out of me. He's typically thrown 100 pitches by the end of the 5th or 6th inning, and then implodes. I'd like to grab him by the throat and say "throw strikes...... let your team help you, for crying out loud!!".

 

The comment about the "Cubs and wins" was wrong. Plain and simple. I'm a Cardinal fan, and I'm used to bantering with Cubs fans (including my son, who is a huge Cubs fan). This was the wrong forum for it. Like I said, I could have done an edit and tried to hide from it, but I own the fact that I said it. I'm not sure what else you want. I made a mistake by posting it here, as harmless as my intentions were.

 

Frankly, YOU laid the bait when you started this thread, Vance. You'll never fess up, but there's really no other motive for you to start the thread, considering it's such a "no contest".

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

It's not the "Award for having the best ERA". It's the Cy Young Award for the Best Pitcher. It's not Carpenter's fault that he's had great run support, any more than it's Clemens' fault that he's had a lack of it. For those of you who think it should be Clemens in a landslide, and don't think Wins should factor into it, fine. However, that means that Clemens' award last year was a sham. Furthermore, even if wins aren't considered, Carpenter is still a legitimate candidate. He's pitched 7 complete games, with 4 shutouts. He and Roger have thrown a similar number of pitches, but Chris has efficiently spread those pitches out over more innings.

 

Fight the good fight, Amy. I've done my best, but you'll never get past the ERA thing. :)

 

How about these stats?

 

VORP-

Clemens: 80.1

Carpenter: 73.9

 

Pitchers EXP W/L

Carpenter: 16-7

Clemens: 15-4

 

Those two stats add a completely different perspective.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Settle down, CubbieBlue. The Prior comment was in no way meant to be offensive. Ask any Cardinal fan, and he'll tell you that he (or she, in Amy's case) would LOVE to have Prior. I only used him, because I thought it would be an example that the folks here could relate to. Wouldn't it be great if Prior could pitch deeper into games? Especially with the Cubs' bullpen struggling. That's all I was saying. Don't be so defensive.

 

The difference in ERA is .71. When this thread started 3 weeks ago, the difference was .93. So it's dropped almost a quarter of a run in just 3 weeks.

 

I don't disagree that there's a big difference between a .3 gap, and a .75 gap. That's why I asked the question. I guess we'll see what happens.

 

Don't tell me to settle down, I'm actually quite calm. You've been doing this ever since you got here, and as you can see, I'm not the only one that's noticed. You'll make your little cheap shot here and there, and then try to cover it up with comments like, "oh, but I'd love to have Prior on my team."

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

Frankly, YOU laid the bait when you started this thread, Vance. You'll never fess up, but there's really no other motive for you to start the thread, considering it's such a "no contest".

 

There's no motive...then why did I start an AL Cy thread as well?

 

I started the thread on a CUBS message board!!! If I really wanted to bait Cardinal fans, wouldn't I have started this on Cards Talk or the SportsCartel or BirdsontheBat?

 

You really have some great insights into my motives...:roll:

 

Want to tell me what I'm going to have for lunch while you're at it?