wow, what a hideous website. Goat-puke green with no formatting.
Printable View
wow, what a hideous website. Goat-puke green with no formatting.
Did he do arguably better? Argue it then. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
But I'm not buying. Webb's ERA was 1.30 under adjusted league ERA, and Santana's was 1.68 under. Webb's K/BB ratio was about 3/1, Santana's was about 3.5/1. Webb's WHIP was 1.196, Santana's was 1.148. These are very significant differences in the numbers. For good measure, Santana even pitched 6 2/3 more innings in the same number of starts. The only thing Webb did better with was wins. It's not Santana's fault that he had a bad bullpen and sometimes lacked run support.
It's not hard to understand. Webb had 22 wins. Simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
Only if you argue without regard for facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
This where Webb "arguably" did better. He was in a group of excellent pitchers clustered around the same level. Webb, Dempster, Haren, Volquez, etc. Excellent, ace pitchers, but not Lincecum/Santana level.Quote:
and by any quantifiable measure did better then Lidge, Dempster, Hamels, etc.
Now, I'm really glad Lincecum won, but, a line in this AP news story baffles me. "Lincecum defied detractors—and the laws of physics"? SAY WHAT? This is a news article, right? Can we please do without the ridiculous exaggeration in our news? Lincecum did not defy the laws of physics, nor did he come particularly close.
Oh God.... Don't say its because of wins....Santana was better than him, look at almost all other statsQuote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Ok so Dempster isn't the best pitcher compare to the rest but hey at least he made the list :) Needless to say Lincecum deserves it more than the rest.
Well, I said it's arguable. In ERA and K's Santana wasn't all that much better then Webb anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
The only argument is wins... Webb's ERA is not quite as good as it looks because of park factors, which makes the ERA difference between the two greater than it appears.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Besides, "Player A's stats are not that much better than Player B's stats" is not a very good argument for Player B being better.
Webb was a lock for the NL Cy Young through most of the season, but the baseball season is 6 months, and he really stunk it up in the last 2.
Would you say that Webb's ERA wasn't all that much better than Ted Lilly's?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Okay, Santana was very slightly better then Webb... but you guys are acting like its a horrible, terrible, unjustifiable thing that Webb goes above Santana (someone said he should be below Lidge... WTF?)
3.30Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
4.09
Thats a BIG difference... nothing like Santana vs. Webb
Adjusting for park factors makes Webb's ERA BETTER. Chase Field is a hitter's park.Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
Webb had a 139 ERA+, 6th in the National League. His raw ERA was 10th in the NL.
Ha. Man, check your math. The difference between 4.09 and 3.30 is the same as the difference between 3.30 and 2.53.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
(Not exactly the same, but it's 0.79 vs. 0.77, which, uh, is nothing.)
You're right. I looked at the adjusted league ERAs backwards. My bad. I knew something didn't seem right, but figured Shea may have somehow been more hitter-friendly than Chase this season. It wasn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I was the only one who was really acting like it was a crime. I just don't think Webb deserves any first place votes. As HGM pointed out, any voters who had him over Lincecum or Santana were doing so based solely on wins, because there's NOTHING else it could be based on.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
As for Lidge, I would put him over Webb on account of a 225 ERA+ and no blown saves. Those numbers are insane. Webb's numbers are simply "very good."
Santana wasn't very slightly better than Webb. He was much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
It's not horrible and terrible. It is unjustifiable, using any rational method of justification.
I think I could design a better website with an hour of spare time. I mean that is simple html code that guy is using. I designed better websites in my first week of HTML design class Junior year of high school!