K-Town

I only find one post that says "evaluating a pitcher on Wins is just plain ignorant". That's attacking the argument, not you. Like I said, implying "ignorance" about anyone is ugly, in my opinion. You're entitled to disagree. That's fine, but attacking the argument in that fashion falls within the parameters of the community, so don't be upset when it happens. I'm hardly "upset". I just think there are more appropriate ways to attack an argument, that's all.

I only find one post that says "evaluating a pitcher on Wins is just plain ignorant". That's attacking the argument, not you. Like I said, implying "ignorance" about anyone is ugly, in my opinion. You're entitled to disagree.

I'm with you, mostly. But I've got to think that the Red Sox are the favorite until somebody proves otherwise. They just have too much firepower. I'm just not at all sold on the White Sox OR the A's. Every team seems to have a weakness in the NL, except for the Cards and Braves, so I expect them to battle it out for the NL crown. Whichever team is healthier could be the team to beat. Once you're in the playoffs, virtually anything can happen. It should be interesting.

Like I said, if there is no opposing stance, then why even ask the question? It's fine to have an opposing stance. That was the nature of this thread. But you might want to back it up with something more than "Clemens isn't durable." You know I've given you more than that. Let's not go over this again. I'm accused of "making up" the opposing stance. If that's the case, then it implies that there IS no opposing stance. So why ask the question?

I disagree with you. I didn't really see any name-calling, and very little 'ugliness'. I also disagree with your assertion that '(Cardinal fans would have been long-ago banned from this board for such behavior, and if I retliate in kind, I'll surely be gone).', because that is simply not true. It smacks of the children from CardsTalk who come over here and post 'Cubs Suck, you guys are morans', and then complain because they get banned. Go figure. Nobody wants you to 'conform', however, your arguments were continuously beating the same points over and over again. When several other posters refuted this with more detailed statistical information, you either ignored it, or fell back on your previous argument, as if the new information brought into the discussion had no bearing. Please, don't martyr yourself here. You are welcome for debate, and the same rules apply to everyone, but you have to at least TRY to find the middle ground. If that middle ground can't be found, you just agree to disagree, and that's it. JMHO. I've been called "ignorant" twice. Do you want me to show you the posts? To me, that's "ugly". As far as finding a "middle ground", I did that about 4 pages ago: I've also admitted to being a "homer" a LONG time ago. I've also said that it wouldn't be unfair for Clemens to win. Is that not "middle ground"? As for being banned. Don't tell me what I would and wouldn't be banned for. I WAS banned. I made two posts before being banned. Here they are. Tell me which one is out of line: Which rule did I break?

Like I said, if there is no opposing stance, then why even ask the question?

This thread has turned into alot of ugliness and name-calling, so I'm done. I thought that most of you were above that (Cardinal fans would have been long-ago banned from this board for such behavior, and if I retliate in kind, I'll surely be gone). By the way, there were also some EXCELLENT points made, some of which I hadn't considered before. I've already told you I'm a "homer". I've already told you that Clemens is having an unbelievable year. I've already told you that if Clemens wins, I wouldn't consider it an injustice. Why ask the question in the first place, if you just want everybody to say that same thing? Sorry I didn't conform. It's not my style. :wink:

Believe it or not, Reggie Sanders (of all people) was on pace for 30/30 this year, before his injury. That doesn't make him a candidate as one of the best all-around players, by any stretch, though. I pretty much agree with the opinions expressed. A-rod should be a lock. Oh, I'm not saying it still won't ever happen. I'm just saying it'll be rare. Sanders had a shot, but he got hurt. Guys like Abreu and Beltran are prime candidates, but we'll have to see if they can put a season like that together. By the way, how old is Cabrera? Isn't he really young, like 22? I think if he is given a few years, he could develop into one of the best. And I know his average is low, but why hasn't Andruw Jones name been mentioned (at least that I have seen, I've only skimmed through this thread)? Andruw has a good bat, and good defense, but hasn't really been an effective base-stealer (even less in the last 5 years). Same for Cabrera. Pujols has actually been one of the most effective base-stealers in baseball this year, which probably makes it a toss-up between him and A-rod as the best all-around player THIS YEAR.

By the way, Roy Oswalt has managed to win 14 games on that pathetic Houston team, but Clemens can only come up with 11? Maybe it's because Oswalt has stuck around for more than 7 innings 10 times this year. If I were in Houston's lineup, I think I'd be more inclined to put forth a little more effort for a guy who's going to gut it out, too.

So Carp has a .60 ERA in MMP this year huh? When did he face them? Let me guess, was it back when they were one of the worst teams in the league and were 15 games under .500? 2 appearances don't show much. Depends on what categories I want to look at? Well, I tend to look at the ones that actually matter. And in those categories, Clemens is equal to, or better than Carp. You want three pitchers that had the year Carp is having or better? * Randy Johnson - 2002 * Pedro Martinez - 1997 (only 17 wins, but he was on the Expos - not the Cardinals) * Greg Maddux - 1995 (19 wins - 10 of your coveted complete games... oh yeah, and a 1.63 ERA) This is just a small sample that I looked up in two minutes. I can go on listing if you'd like. Okay, I'll go one more: Roger Clemens - 2005 You don't want me to bring up AL pitchers, there's a ton over there too. I said the last 10 years. 1995 wasn't the last 10 years. So you found 2. 2005 isn't over yet, so we're not counting 2005 Clemens. Go ahead an list more, if you think you can. If you want me to tell you how well Houston was hitting when Carpenter shut them down at Minute Maid, then you'll first need to tell me how well the teams were hitting the Clemens has beat there. I SAID that 2 games don't mean much, so you didn't really need to mention that. But it does show that it's not impossible for a pitcher to throw well there. The categories that matter? I'm pretty sure that "wins" matter (at least they did last year, when Clemens won the award). I'm also pretty sure that "close and late game performance" matters. Whether you want to admit it or not, the fact that Carpenter has saved his bullpen a few innings here and there matters, too.

Carpenter has a .60 ERA in "the juice box" this year. Granted, he's only pitched 2 games there, but it's not like it's impossible to pitch there. You think that alot of guys have the year that Carpenter is having? Name 3 NL pitchers who has had this kind of year, in the last 10 years. Carpenter is top 5 in virtually every pitching category that you can imagine. Clemens isn't. As I pointed out earlier, Clemens leads in several relevant pitching categories, and Carpenter leads in several relevant pitching categories. It just depends on which ones you want to look at.

All I'm saying is be consistent. If you gave it to Clemens last year because he won more games than Peavy and RJ, that's fine. Just don't change the standard this year, when Clemens is on the short end of that measurement. That's all. Carpenter leads in wins. Carpenter leads in strikeouts. Carpenter leads in K/BB. Carpenter leads in innings pitched. WHIP is almost a toss-up. Clemens leads in OPS against (but has faced slightly weaker opponents). Carpenter has been better in "close and late" games. Carpenter leads in alot of meaningful categories. Clemens leads in alot meaningful categories. I'm not just making a case to be argumentative. I'm making a case, because everyone is blinded by Clemens' ERA (rightfully so, I suppose). But there's more to the game than simply ERA, as we learned in last year's Cy Young voting. Fair enough. But we're trying to get you to see that it's not simply an ERA. Last years ERA leader led with a good ERA. But Clemens has an ERA that's unheard of in the modern era. He's at or near the top in every statistical category, just like Carp. But he has an ERA that is extraordinary. That's what puts him over the top. It's something that hasn't been done in many of our lifetimes, and probably won't be done again. Yeah, McGwire hit 70 homers that year, but he wasn't alone in breaking that record, and he wasn't at or near the top in virtually every other category. That's fine. Clemens has a great ERA. He's not going to break any records (ala Sosa & McGwire). He's not going to do something that's never been done before. He's got a great ERA. That's the bottom line. But he won last year, being tied for 5th in the NL in ERA. The emphasis just seems to fluctuate, depending on what's convenient for Clemens.

All I'm saying is be consistent. If you gave it to Clemens last year because he won more games than Peavy and RJ, that's fine. Just don't change the standard this year, when Clemens is on the short end of that measurement. That's all. Carpenter leads in wins. Carpenter leads in strikeouts. Carpenter leads in K/BB. Carpenter leads in innings pitched. WHIP is almost a toss-up. Clemens leads in OPS against (but has faced slightly weaker opponents). Carpenter has been better in "close and late" games. Carpenter leads in alot of meaningful categories. Clemens leads in alot meaningful categories. I'm not just making a case to be argumentative. I'm making a case, because everyone is blinded by Clemens' ERA (rightfully so, I suppose). But there's more to the game than simply ERA, as we learned in last year's Cy Young voting.

Believe it or not, Reggie Sanders (of all people) was on pace for 30/30 this year, before his injury. That doesn't make him a candidate as one of the best all-around players, by any stretch, though. I pretty much agree with the opinions expressed. A-rod should be a lock.

Dude Carps year is great. Hes just in the wrong league this year to win the Cy Young. I think herein lies the problem. Carp this year and Pujols the last two/three years are finishing second. Any other year or any other league, less Bonds, Lee, and Clemens, either of them could take home the award. I'm not saying it's not legitimate, I just think Cards fans are sick of their guys finishing second. Edit - and their team :( That's probably about as accurate as anything that's been posted in this thread. Good post, indifferent.

Canseco (or anybody else) hasn't said anything about Pujols. But no, I don't have proof. You're the one that brought up the "proof" thing, not me. So don't act like I'm the one being ridiculous.

Dude Carps year is great. Hes just in the wrong league this year to win the Cy Young. I hope you're wrong, but that's a very fair statement. Thanks.

I have proof that he did last Saturday, in a tight game, with his team in a heated playoff race. Other than that, youre right, I don't have "proof". Do you have any "proof" that Clemens hasn't taken steroids? Because Canseco speculated that he probably has, and Canseco is turning out to be a pretty dependable source. *That should ruffle some feathers here!!* :lol: :wink: Haha, 8 SCORELESS INNINGS! With Brad Lidge in the bullpen, 8 scoreless innings is usually enough. He did his job, and he was smart enough to know that his season and health was more important than a complete game. And the steroids thing won't get anythin going here. Pitchers taking steroids is just dumb. His arm would've fallen off 15 years ago if he was on roids. Really? What if he wasn't taking them 15 years ago? Would his arm have been able to predict that steroids were coming, and fallen off out of fear? You're right. 8 scoreless innings is usually enough. Now if we could just get MLB to allow Houston to play nothing but 7-inning games, Clemens would be all set.

I have proof that he did last Saturday, in a tight game, with his team in a heated playoff race. Other than that, youre right, I don't have "proof". Do you have any "proof" that Clemens hasn't taken steroids? Because Canseco speculated that he probably has, and Canseco is turning out to be a pretty dependable source. *That should ruffle some feathers here!!* :lol: :wink:

Look, Clemens has been TERRIFIC. I've already said that I can see the argument for him to win the Cy Young Award. Who knows, Carpenter may wear down and end up with an ERA of 4, and all of this will be a moot point. I know for sure that everybody realizes what a great year Clemens is having. I just HOPE that alot of people realize what an unbelievable year Carpenter is having (the year for a NL starting pitcher in 6 or 8 years).

No Roger is not durable at all. The dude just breaksdown all the time. Who brokedown last year and wasnt available for the playoffs? In Clemens career of 21 full years he has pitched in 29 games 17 of those years, 2 of those were his first two years. The dude is just not durable. Yep, 21 years in the major leagues. Definitely not durable. :roll: Again, let's keep things in context.

No Roger is not durable at all. The dude just breaksdown all the time. Who brokedown last year and wasnt available for the playoffs? In Clemens career of 21 full years he has pitched in 29 games or more in 17 of those years, 2 of those were his first two years. The dude is just not durable. "Durable", as compared to Carpenter this year. Let's keep thing in context, please.

And Chad Cordero is better than both of them. :roll: 1.88 is "well below 2", in my opinion, when talking about ERA.

He took himself out of ONE game after EIGHT SHUTOUT INNINGS, and you act like this is an everyday occurance. Clemens is quite possibly one of the most durable guys in baseball HISTORY. Carpenter on the other hand, hahahahaha. I think he's spent more time on the DL than on the active roster. And since when does he only pitch at home? Wow, you pulled that one out of nowhere. He said he might not travel with the team when he's not pitching, but the Astros agreed to let him do that. He's earned that right. And how many guys have come out of retirement? What is wrong with that? He's out of retirement and making everyone look foolish when he's on the mound. Wow, just wow. I wonder what it's like to only see Cardinal red. It probably sucks. :wink: I hate to even think about it.

And by the end of the year, Carpenter will likely have 25 more innings than Clemens. Is 50 extra innings the standard for this debate? Again, you're making rules up as we go along. And now playoff contention is a decisive factor, too. OK, I'm glad we're getting these things cleared up. Yup. It's been stated pretty clear why Carp has won 6 more games. Just as it was stated pretty clearly last year why Randy Johnson didn't win as many games as Roger Clemens (because RJ was on a horrible team). It didn't seem to matter last year. Nobody wanted to give the award to Randy Johnson. Now that the tables are turned, everybody suddenly sees the light, and wants to give consideration to a guy who isn't getting the run support. Hypocritical.