K-Town

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.

It's been almost 3 years since Carpenter's surgery. It's time to get over it. The biceps problem last September/October was a nerve issue. It wasn't from his workload, and wasn't related to his surgery. It was a freakish thing, much like Brad Penny has suffered from. Carpenter is 31s in Pitcher Abuse Points. He's NOT being abused this year. Arm injuries most often occur because a pitcher is abused (left in a game too long when he's stuggling, extremely high pitch counts, etc.). That hasn't been the case for Carpenter. When was the last time that ANY starting pitcher was pitching well, but the team decided to rest him in the middle of August? Are the White Sox sitting their pitchers down? They've all but locked up their division. Carpenter will get plenty of rest down the stretch (I've already explained that Reyes was called up last week for that very purpose). After September call-ups, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a 6-man rotation, with Wainwright and Reyes alternating starts, to give everyone else plenty of rest. We'll see.

More than likely, they will never stop believing in luck Was it bad coaching by the Cubs that caused Prior to miss significant time after a line drive hit him in the elbow? Was it bad coaching by the Cardinals a few years ago when a lot of their pitchers were injured? I would argue in both cases, it was simply bad luck. 4 or 5 starts isn't "significant time", in my opinion, especially considering how well Rusch did. Every team has good luck and every team has bad luck. I'm not saying that luck isn't a factor. It's silly to think that one team is "luckier" for years and years, though. Those sorts of things tend to even out. Anybody who thinks that the Cards have been "lucky" this year isn't paying attention. They've played the better part of the 2nd half without a former MVP (Walker), a perennial all-star and Gold Glove third baseman (Rolen), an outfielder (Sanders) who was on pace for 30 homers and 30 steals (something that's only happened 33 times in the NL in the last 50 years), and a guy who is probably the best young catcher in the NL (Molina). One of the best closers in baseball (Izzy) missed 2 weeks in April/May. One of their better middle relievers Cal Eldred (3.76 ERA last year, and 1.21 ERA this year) missed 2 months. One of the best centerfielders in baseball (Edmonds) missed over a week in June. Mike Lincoln, who looked unhittable at teams early last year, hasn't been healthy enough to play for almost 2 years. Like I said, the rest of the league should consider THEMSELVES "lucky" that the Cards' starting rotation has been healthy all year, based on what we've seen from their 6th starter (Reyes).

Marquis has been abused. I won't argue with that. It's a struggle just for him to get thru 6 innings, because he's constantly in and out of jams. Carpenter hasn't been abused. He's just been good. Carpenter is simply mowing hitters down late in games (.416 OPS against in innings 7 thru 9 is simply incredible). If a pitcher has thrown 90 pitches in the 8th inning, and is dominating, and isn't the least bit tired, then why would you pull him out? What's the value in leaving him in? So he can pile up on the CG stat? No, to get the opponent out. Isn't that the idea? :roll: As I told you, he has a .416 OPS against in innings 7 thru 9.

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:

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.

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.

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.

Marquis has been abused. I won't argue with that. It's a struggle just for him to get thru 6 innings, because he's constantly in and out of jams. Carpenter hasn't been abused. He's just been good. Carpenter is simply mowing hitters down late in games (.416 OPS against in innings 7 thru 9 is simply incredible). If a pitcher has thrown 90 pitches in the 8th inning, and is dominating, and isn't the least bit tired, then why would you pull him out?

I think you're getting cause and effect twisted. I'm not sure it's fair to say that "the starters should be pulled, because the bullpen is so good". I think it's a matter of the bullpen performing really well BECAUSE the starters are going a little deeper into games (therefore, the bullpen can be used wisely, and remains fresh). If Larussa starts pulling pitchers out just for the sake of pulling them (which would be the case with Carpenter, because he hasn't been "abused" this year, he's just been really good), then it's more work for the bullpen, and the bullpen may not be as fresh, and probably not as effective when you really need them to be.

Didn't Glendon Rusch perform "out of his mind" when he filled in for Prior for 4 or 5 starts this year? It goes both ways. The reconstructive surgery isn't a factor anymore. Most pitchers eventually end up being stronger after surgery than they were before. Personally, I'm relieved to see (from your list above) that Carpenter hasn't gone over 120 pitches even one time lately. It's not like Carpenter is struggling to get into the late innings. He's typically stronger when he leaves the game than he was when he started. When a pitcher starts wearing down late in the game, and his mechanics become flawed, that's when you need to worry. That's not hte case for Carpenter. Furthermore, the schedule has worked out well so that each starter for the Cards is managing to get an extra day off between most starts (that's why Reyes was called up last week, to give the other starters an extra day). Zambrano is 2nd in all of baseball in Pitcher Abuse Points this year. Prior is 11th (despite missing several starts). Clemens is 22nd, despite the fact that he hasn't managed to finish a game all year Carpenter is way down the list, at 31st. The Cards' rotation has been incredibly healthy for the last 2 years. At one point do you stop thinking that it's "luck", and wonder if the coaches know what they're doing? After seeing what Anthony Reyes can do, the Cards' opponents should probably be thankful that the Cards haven't needed to put him in the rotation this year.

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 give it to the best pitcher. It's not called the MVP (most valuable pitcher). There you go, then. That's a fair answer.

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.

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 only find one post that says "evaluating a pitcher on Wins is just plain ignorant". That's attacking the argument, not you. Yeah that was me and I 100% stand by that statement. By ignorant I meant that evaluating a pitcher by wins is ignoring what actually goes into a win. In order to win a game, the offense actually has to score runs. Which the astros have not done this year for clemens. Top and bottom half of innings are played in baseball and the pitcher (other than of course when they come up to bat) only have control over half of the game. And even then they dont have full control, as they must rely on their defense at least some of the time. Thats why we like to use stats that a pitcher has more control over to evaluate them. I dont mean any of this in a condescending manner, I am just trying to justify the use of the term ignorant. Right. I don't disagree that wins don't tell the whole story. But the farther a pitcher goes into a game, the better chance he has of winning. So "ignorant" is a little harsh, in my opinion. I'll agree that the deeper a pitcher goes into games factors into the equation, but it's not like Clemens has done what he's done by pitching five innings and out. He's pitched six and seven innings in most of his starts and even eight in a few. His win totals are the result of some miniscule run support, not any lack of effort on his part. Finally, I think Clemens deserves this Cy Young because what he's done this year is likely the best pitching performance we've witnessed in the last 10-15 years at least, and maybe the last half century. It would be a shame if that weren't rewarded with a Cy Young. Is Clemens over-hyped? Maybe. I'm not a fan of Clemens. In fact, since I hate the Astros almost as much as I hate the Cardinals and I also hate the Yankees....Clemens has never been one of my favorites. You've made a rather compelling case that maybe Clemens shouldn't have received the Cy last season, but you've done nothing to make me believe he doesn't deserve it this season. Wins are a much over-rated stat to me. I won't say they are completely worthless, and at times they may reflect a pitcher's perseverance or willingness to hang around long enough to keep his team in a game, but I don't think Clemens can be knocked for having a low win total. He's just been a victim of some of the worst run support I've ever witnessed. Considering he hasn't had a start where he's given up more than three runs, not only do I find it amazing that he only has so few wins, I can't see how he's ended up with 4 losses! That's reasonable. There's still plenty of baseball to play. My guess is that one of these guys (I have no clue which one) won't be able to keep up their current pace. If they both keep close to the current pace, it's going to be an absolute shame that one of them has to lose the award. Meanwhile, the voters are going to have some 'splainin' to do if they give the award to Clemens this year for the exact opposite reasons that they gave it to him last year. Why do wins matter? Well, quite frankly, if your team isn't going to score any runs, then do you NEED a Cy Young Award winner on the mound? The Astros could have thrown Tom Arnold out there and gotten the same results that Clemens got, in those games where Houston didn't score. Meanwhile, the Cardinals couldn't have thrown Tom Arnold out there, and gotten the same results that Carpenter has gotten. In that regard, Clemens hasn't been the "difference-maker" that Carpenter has been. It's not Clemens' fault, but he still didn't get any better results in those games when Houston didn't score than an average pitcher would have gotten.

nm

I only find one post that says "evaluating a pitcher on Wins is just plain ignorant". That's attacking the argument, not you. Yeah that was me and I 100% stand by that statement. By ignorant I meant that evaluating a pitcher by wins is ignoring what actually goes into a win. In order to win a game, the offense actually has to score runs. Which the astros have not done this year for clemens. Top and bottom half of innings are played in baseball and the pitcher (other than of course when they come up to bat) only have control over half of the game. And even then they dont have full control, as they must rely on their defense at least some of the time. Thats why we like to use stats that a pitcher has more control over to evaluate them. I dont mean any of this in a condescending manner, I am just trying to justify the use of the term ignorant. Right. I don't disagree that wins don't tell the whole story. But the farther a pitcher goes into a game, the better chance he has of winning. So "ignorant" is a little harsh, in my opinion.

As a Cards fan, I'm not going to totally disagree with you (and I'm not offended). They didn't play well in the World Series last year. Until the Cards prove that they CAN win it, then you have to assume that they won't. One difference would be that they'll have a true "ace" to take with them this year (barring injury). Carpenter wasn't available for the WS last year, and it was pretty apparent that the Cards didn't have a single pitcher who could stop the bleeding for them. Carpenter is that guy. And keep in mind that anything can happen in the playoffs. Just because something happens in one series of games doesn't mean that the same thing will happen in the next. The Cubs' recent losing streak is a good example. No offense, but the Cubs were just awful, in every aspect of the game, for a week and a half. Then, when the Cards came to town the Cubs looked great. Baseball is a funny game, and you never know what will happen in any 4 or 7 game stretch.

First of all, thanks for being cool. I didn't have to dig very deep for the posts that got me banned. It was just last week. :lol: I just noticed a PM from the mod concerning my banned account, but last week I couldn't for the life of me find a link to contact the mod. But contacting the mod definitely was my intention, if I hadn't been too "ignorant" to figure out how to do that (I still don't know how to do it, quite frankly). Anyway, I'm not here to cause trouble. I would have never started a thread on behalf of Carpenter, but the thread was there, so I figured I'd take the opportunity to toot Carp's horn a little bit (as noted, Clemens doesn't need any "tooting" on his behalf). Anyway, thanks again for being reasonable.

There ya go. Let's face it, are there EVER any opinions swayed about ANYTHING on these message boards? This isn't exactly a revelation.

I'm not ignoring facts. Like I've said, I know full well that there's a solid case for Clemens. I understand your point about Carpenter's injury history. You have to keep in mind that the Cards have been INCREDIBLY patient with him. Carpenter said he felt good enough to pitch in the playoffs last year, but the Cards refused to risk it (Carpenter thanked them for making his health a priority by signing a 3-year contract for a ridiculously low dollar amount last winter). I think the thing to watch with him is pitch counts and whether he's laboring in late innings. He truly seems to get stronger in the 8th or 9th innings. I think that's a good sign. If he's getting tired, the mechanics go south, and that's when you re-injure, I think. That's not the case with Carpenter. He's been incredibly efficient. He's actually more of a strikeout pitcher than Clemens is at this point, but he's efficient enough to get himself into the late innings. I credit him for that, and it's pretty much my main argument in his favor (although it's clearly not enough of an argument to sway any opinions).

See, that's the thing. From reading that, it sounds like you assume that Clemens doesn't want to go out there for the 9th inning. You have no way of knowing he doesn't want to. There is a very good chance Garner is just being SMART about it and pulling him early. Just because he pulled himself out of one game after 8 innings does not mean he doesn't can't finish, or doesn't want to be out there every other game. Maybe. I think a smart manager knows when a guy is "spent", and doesn't have to assume that he's done after 7 innings. Either Garner isn't very sharp, or Clemens truly is "spent" after 7. I don't know. I haven't seen enough of Clemens' games to say one way or another. I know that Carpenter would go out kicking and screaming if he were pitching well and Larussa tried to pull him. Another issue might be the fact that he's not getting any runs, so Garner may feel compelled to pinch hit for him late in games, to try to get something going. Looking at his pitch counts, he hasn't given himself a CHANCE to go into the 8th and 9th innings all that often, because he's working pretty hard to get through the first 7 (kinda like what you guys see with Prior). It's hard to believe that a guy with Clemens WHIP is averaging 100 pitches through 7 innings. I haven't seen him pitch very often, but he must be running up alot of counts, for whatever reason (Not wanting to challenge hitters? I don't know). It's probably a combination of alot of things, and quite frankly, I'm probably being overly critical because I'm a "homer". :wink:

If you meant the voters specifically, then that's one thing, but I hope you can see that it doesn't exactly read that way. The STANCE that everybody (which would presumably include the people present, since you didn't specify who you were talking about) had changed their minds for the sake of Clemens was what I was referring to as ignorant. Although your whole "Clemens wants to hit the showers, while Carpenter wants to stay out and win" argument seems lacking in foundation as well, the above was what I was referring to. I figured that would have been evident, as my entire post was referring to THAT specifically, but I guess not. I meant the voters, or more specifically, the media (shows like Around the Horn and Pardon the Interruption, etc.). I probably should have specified. "Clemens wants to hit the showers" was more sarcastic than ignorant, in my opinion. Basically, I can't, for the life of me, understand why Clemens isn't expected to go longer than 7 innings. The only logical reason is that he's being "coddled". Is it because he's old? Maybe. Regardless, if he's being coddled (which he apparently is), then I don't have as much respect for him as I do for a guy who can't WAIT to get out there in the 8th & 9th inning and finish what he started for his team.

Like I said, if there is no opposing stance, then why even ask the question? What does that have to do with what I said at all? I said don't just MAKE IT UP. You know, like you did with the whole "You're being hypocritical because you were behind Clemens last year and then changed the rules to support Clemens this year" bit. You'd be hard pressed to find many on this board with that stance, but you seemed pretty determined to make that the way people here stand. (and if you weren't tying those beliefs to us, then why counter with them when we're the ones you're talking to?) And since you chose to comment authoritatively on something you did not understand, then you were being ignorant. Period. Incidentally, "Ignorant" isn't an insult, contrary to popular belief. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant; it's simply lacking information. You should at least acknowledge that you lack information, though, and certainly not label people based on missing information. I certainly don't see any cause for you to be offended over being called ignorant when you're calling people hypocritical for having beliefs you don't know that they have. At least when I called your comments ignorant, I did so on the basis of things actually mentioned in this discussion, unlike your comments on hypocrisy. I meant that it would be "hypocritical" for Clemens to win the award this year for the exact opposite reasons that he won last year. THAT'S why I think Carpenter should win, because that's the precedence that's been set. I never said that anybody here agreed with it. I simply pointed out that it's the precedence, so what should be good for the goose should be good for the gander. Nobody here has to agree, but if the voters use that philosophy when voting, then it would indeed be hypocritical of them. My stance is that Carpenter should be considered for the Cy Young Award. That's my "stance" (the pages of evidence and opinions that I've presented aren't "my stance", they are simply provided to support "my stance"). You're saying that my stance is "made up". Based on the title of the thread, there are only two possible stances: 1) Clemens should win 2) Carpenter should win I took the 2nd stance. You said it was "made up", which only leaves one possible stance. If there's only one possible stance, then why ask the question to begin with? As for "ignorance", it means "showing a lack of knowledge or intelligence". I consider that an insult. In my opinion it's an ugly word. That's my stance on "ignorance". Is my stance on that "made up", also?