Joe Mauer: AL MVP

[Paulie]

Christ...

Here we go with this elitist know it all idiot calling EVERYONE out now.

You're out of your league chump.

 

[SenseCommon]

ehh i'll argue this all day with you. The wins and losses aren't his fault. If he is pitching to a 2.53 era then he isn't getting run support. Thats not his problem.

Actually they are, and that is wrong with a lot of modern followers of the game.

The ENTIRE point of starters is TO WIN GAMES.

The fact that there are a number of picthers who won on bad teams proves it IS about the pitcher, not the team around him.

If it was 'the team' Tom Seaver would have been just another player, Steve Carlton forgotten, Jake peavy a bum, Randy Johnson a stiff and so on.

Claiming that W-L doesn't matter is bullshit.

We both know the two Cy Youngs this year where wrong, they used 'other criteria' to pass over more deserving pitchers based on new age stats like the laughable 'quality start'.

Things like his own teams lack of offense, defense, and a bullpen, cost starting pitchers something as trivial as a win, all the time.

A win is a team thing. It is NOT a starting pitcher thing!

You are an idiot, LOL!

 

[Xenophon]

Things like his own teams lack of offense, defense, and a bullpen, cost starting pitchers something as trivial as a win, all the time.

A win is a team thing. It is NOT a starting pitcher thing!

You are an idiot, LOL!

We are talking about something you don't understand here, its called baseball.

Now go back to playing with your dick, the adults are busy.

 

[Xenophon]

xeno


it's not the pitchers problem if he is giving up an average of 2 runs per game and isn't getting wins becuase his team isn't giving him the run support


that is idiotic logic.

You can't expect pitchers to throw shut outs every game. Give Santana run support of 3.5+ and he probably wins over 20 games that year.

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

 

[Andrew2382]

Tom Seaver started 35 games and managed to win 25 of those starts. Seaver received 148 runs from his offense in those 35 starts: 4.23 runs per game.

 

[Andrew2382]

of course wins/losses are important...but the pitchers ultimate job is to give up as few runs as possible and to give his team a chance to win the game.

If a pitcher is giving out 2 runs a game on average and only has 16 wins....you can't fault him..

thats his offense not producing for him plain and simple.

I'll take a 15 game winner with a 2.00 era over a 25 game winner with a 4.5 era


Put that 15 game winner on a team that will produce runs and he will be dominant

 

[Oddball]

Do I gotta move a sports thread to the Flame Zone?

 

[Paulie]

xeno


it's not the pitchers problem if he is giving up an average of 2 runs per game and isn't getting wins becuase his team isn't giving him the run support


that is idiotic logic.

You can't expect pitchers to throw shut outs every game. Give Santana run support of 3.5+ and he probably wins over 20 games that year.

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

I don't think there's a better example of that these days than Lincecum.

Greinke this past year is certainly another one.

 

[Paulie]

Do I gotta move a sports thread to the Flame Zone?

Please don't. Just move the idiot newbie out of it that has no idea what the fuck he's talking about

 

[Andrew2382]

In 2008 the Mets have scored 12 runs in Santana’s six starts. 2 runs a game. In the three games Santana has not allowed an earned run, the Mets have scored three runs. Three runs. Three games. Like last year, the Mets aren’t hitting when Santana is throwing up zeros. In the 20 games this year not started by Santana, the Mets have scored 107 runs (5.35 runs per game)

 

[SenseCommon]

They got Santana to be an ace, his numbers are hardly overwhelming as a Met:

2008 NYM W16 L7 ERA2.53
2009 NYM W13 L9 ERA3.13

You seriously made this statement?


2008: 66 ER in over 234 innings equaling a 2.53 ERA ... 206 hits and 63 BB in over 234 innings equaling a 1.148 WHIP ... 206 K to 63 BB

2009: Missed 9 starts due to injury ... 58 ER in over 166 innings equaling a 3.13 ERA ... 156 hits and 46 BB in over 166 innings equaling a 1.212 ... 146 K to 46 BB

That's called a top 3 pitcher in baseball!

 

[Xenophon]

Tom Seaver started 35 games and managed to win 25 of those starts. Seaver received 148 runs from his offense in those 35 starts: 4.23 runs per game.

Which means if he had an ERA of 4.22 (which we both agree sucks) he would still win.

See what i mean now?

 

[Xenophon]

xeno


it's not the pitchers problem if he is giving up an average of 2 runs per game and isn't getting wins becuase his team isn't giving him the run support


that is idiotic logic.

You can't expect pitchers to throw shut outs every game. Give Santana run support of 3.5+ and he probably wins over 20 games that year.

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

I don't think there's a better example of that these days than Lincecum.

Greinke this past year is certainly another one.

Both were bad picks.

The kid in seattle had three more wins and was only .15 higher in ERA then Grinke, he was clearly the winner.

And the two Card pitchers were BOTH better then Tim and didn't get the nod.

A lot of the awards were questionable, like manager of the year in the AL.

Socia wins it when he had no compition in his devision and lost in the playoffs?

Giradi or Gardenhire both did better.

It was like retrads voted this year.

 

[Paulie]

In 2008 the Mets have scored 12 runs in Santana’s six starts. 2 runs a game. In the three games Santana has not allowed an earned run, the Mets have scored three runs. Three runs. Three games. Like last year, the Mets aren’t hitting when Santana is throwing up zeros. In the 20 games this year not started by Santana, the Mets have scored 107 runs (5.35 runs per game)

The lineup gets complacent when he's throwing. It's just psychological bullshit that keeps them from being contenders.

I know full well, I dealt with it as a Phils fan for YEARS.

And you're right about the lineup in a wheel chair. They didn't have their opening day lineup in tact almost the entire year. No Delgado, no beltran for a while, No Reyes for a while, no Wright for a while...

I get where you're coming from. Even still though, he shut us down just about everytime he faced us.

He can get zero run support all year long and if it comes down to the last game of the season and we're playing for the division, if he shuts us down he earned his money for the year. I still believe he was brought in MAINLY to beat us.

 

[Paulie]

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

I don't think there's a better example of that these days than Lincecum.

Greinke this past year is certainly another one.

Both were bad picks.

The kid in seattle had three more wins and was only .15 higher in ERA then Grinke, he was clearly the winner.

And the two Card pitchers were BOTH better then Tim and didn't get the nod.

A lot of the awards were questionable, like manager of the year in the AL.

Socia wins it when he had no compition in his devision and lost in the playoffs?

Giradi or Gardenhire both did better.

It was like retrads voted this year.

I think those votes are in before the postseason starts though, no? So how a team fared in the postseason isn't part of consideration for these awards.

But yes, retards DID vote this year. Fielder finished 4th, behind Ramirez and Howard, and I'm clueless as to how. I guess it's because I don't know anything about baseball according to the new fish.

 

[SenseCommon]

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

I don't think there's a better example of that these days than Lincecum.

Greinke this past year is certainly another one.

Both were bad picks.

The kid in seattle had three more wins and was only .15 higher in ERA then Grinke, he was clearly the winner.

And the two Card pitchers were BOTH better then Tim and didn't get the nod.

A lot of the awards were questionable, like manager of the year in the AL.

Socia wins it when he had no compition in his devision and lost in the playoffs?

Giradi or Gardenhire both did better.

It was like retrads voted this year.

You do realize that knowledgeable baseball fans think people like you are clueless?

Wins and losses are the last thing that reflects upon a starting pitcher. There are too many variables that can prevent a starting pitcher from attaining a personal win. A starting pitcher does not have control over how his defense plays, how his offense hits, or how his bullpen pitches.

I can't believe this is a real discussion! I feel like I'm teaching 5 year olds the game of baseball.

 

[SenseCommon]

No, its idiot logic to claim 'W-L' is nOT a starter's most important stat, and in fact its HIS JOB to win the game no matter what the team behind him.

There are years when good pitchers suffer from a bad team, but they OVERCOME IT career wise.

If the criteria is now NOT going to be is he a winner, why bother keeping stats at all?

If you suck you won't win no matter how good the rest of the team is, but if you are good you will win no matter what.

I don't think there's a better example of that these days than Lincecum.

Greinke this past year is certainly another one.

Both were bad picks.

The kid in seattle had three more wins and was only .15 higher in ERA then Grinke, he was clearly the winner.

And the two Card pitchers were BOTH better then Tim and didn't get the nod.

A lot of the awards were questionable, like manager of the year in the AL.

Socia wins it when he had no compition in his devision and lost in the playoffs?

Giradi or Gardenhire both did better.

It was like retrads voted this year.

Did you really just bring up the playoffs?

 

[Xenophon]

I think those votes are in before the postseason starts though, no? So how a team fared in the postseason isn't part of consideration for these awards.

But yes, retards DID vote this year. Fielder finished 4th, behind Ramirez and Howard, and I'm clueless as to how. I guess it's because I don't know anything about baseball according to the new fish.

In theory its not supposed to include the post season, but they vote AFTER that happens, so human nature can tell us about that.

A lot of people today don't understand the game the way we do, look at the silly fool in this thread calling everyone idoit, he's the kind of moron that believes Joe torre is a hall of fame manager and that modern players don't cheat, they are just 'better.'

 

[Andrew2382]

The Angels used 14 starting pitchers and played without sluggers Torii Hunter and Vladimir Guerrero for long stretches due to injuries. The team's biggest challenge was moving past the sorrow it felt after Adenhart's death.

I have no problem with him wining MoY

I myself would have chosen Gardenhire.

Girardi shouldn't be in the same discussion as these guys. Girardi threw the best team on the field day in and day out and got the results that were expected.

 

[SenseCommon]

I think those votes are in before the postseason starts though, no? So how a team fared in the postseason isn't part of consideration for these awards.

But yes, retards DID vote this year. Fielder finished 4th, behind Ramirez and Howard, and I'm clueless as to how. I guess it's because I don't know anything about baseball according to the new fish.

In theory its not supposed to include the post season, but they vote AFTER that happens, so human nature can tell us about that.

A lot of people today don't understand the game the way we do, look at the silly fool in this thread calling everyone idoit, he's the kind of moron that believes Joe torre is a hall of fame manager and that modern players don't cheat, they are just 'better.'

Yes, Joe Torre is a hall of fame manager.

Modern players cheat, just like players from the past cheated. Who cares?

Are you really this baseball ignorant?