"More valuable" is an extremely arbitrary term. We've been discussing it for 35 pages. It's arbitrary when you ignore the number of quantitative metrics that favor Clemens when trying to determine how valuable a pitcher is. I'm not ignoring them. The metrics don't tell us everything, though. Last Saturday's match-up was a great example. Clemens pitched well, and came away with good "metric", and so did Carpenter. But Carpenter's contribution to his team was so much greater that it wasn't even a contest. The fact that Carpenter gave his team 9 solid innings (while Clemens gave his team 5), following the 13-inning affair the night before, is somewhat a microcosm of why I think Carpenter often helps his team more than the metrics tell us. I was waiting for the situational stuff to come back again. Guess who the "metrics" said was better on that particular night? Carpenter, he allowed the same amount of runs in more innings, it's not that hard to grasp.