We'll just call this an extended spring training until the Bruins and Celtics are out of the playoffs I guess. Besides this team is going to win like 70 out of the 81 home games anyways so who cares about road games.
I don't think I said that actually. I think I said (back in 2009 when Beckett was dominating for most of the year) that if I was starting a team and it was my pick, I'd take a 29 year old with similar success and an outstanding postseason history over a 32 year old who had never pitched a single meaningful game in the Majors.
indirectly, that's saying "Beckett is the better player, I'd rather have him than Halladay". I mean...who's dumb enough to choose the shittier player. Their ages are meaningless, since there's only 3 years between them. If we were talking Bartolo Colon and Clay Bucholz, then the age argument would have some significance.
Llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooooooooooooooooollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Wrong. Most players have their prime years from 27-33. There is more value from a player with 4 of those years left than one who is leaving those years given comparable performance. As a GM starting a team, the dumb one would be the guy that has the choice between two similar players and picks the one leaving his prime rather than the one with a good 4 years left in his prime. Doesn't mean he's necessarily "better", just that he is more likely to provide more value over the length of a contract. And "shittier" is hardly an appropriate word choice here. Beckett at that point compared to Halladay through the same age had an ERA of 3.79 to Halladay's 3.62, a WHIP of 1.22 to Halladay's 1.23, H/9 was 8.2 for Beckett to 8.8 for Halladay, BB/9 was 2.7 to 2.2, K/9 was 8.5 to 6.3, and K/BB was 3.12 for Beckett to 2.83 for Halladay. Their stats were VERY similar, and the more predictive stats (WHIP, K/BB, K/9) favored Beckett. On top of that, Beckett had the postseason resume that Halladay did not. It wasn't anywhere NEAR the no brainer you are trying to make it out to be.
when the sox win kids eat free.... im not looking for that first win.. when it happens there are going to be thousands of chicken tenders to be made. and yes im a sox fan, I got a tattoo to prove.
I have a feeling that Hughes is going to open up the flood gates tomorrow. He'll be safely on my bench.
That's not the right comparison for this argument, is it? Comparative performance through the same age? If the initial question was about whether - going forward - you take 2009 Halladay or 2009 Beckett, you should compare their respective careers to that point. For that, you'd probably start with 2002, when Halladay became the horse he was (somewhat late at age 25), and Beckett over the same period... that comparison would have the following lines: Beckett - 3.83 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 8.3 H/9, 2.7 BB/9, 8.5 K/9, 3.15 K/BB. OPS against .696. Seasonal average of 28 GS, and 172 IP (only two seasons reaching 30 starts to that point in his career). Halladay - 3.13 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 8.6 H/9, 1.6 BB/9, 6.6 K/9, 4.10 K/BB. OPS against .652. Seasonal average of 30 GS and 214 IP (lowered by two seasons, 2004-2005). And then, you'd want to keep in mind that Beckett had amassed a solid chunk of those stats pitching in the NL East, while Halladay's entire career was in the AL East. Over the time period when both were pitching in the AL East, you'd have the following lines: Beckett: 4.05 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 8.5 H/9, 2.3 BB/9, 8.2 K/9, 3.56 K/BB. OPS against .705. Season average of 30 games started, 198 IP. Halladay - 3.11 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 8.6 H/9, 1.5 BB/9, 6.6 K/9, 4.39 K/BB. OPS against .655. Seasonal average of 32 GS and 233 IP. One thing you'll probably notice is that Halladay stayed pretty damn consistent whether you're looking at 2002-2009, or 2006-2009. Beckett's line took a fairly serious hit when he moved to the AL East.
