Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blackout

Is your opinion of Verlander different after last night?

Recommended Posts

guy is 0-3 in the world series with 5 innings per start and an ERA over 7

other than that he's 6-1 in the playoffs with a great ERA in the other series....

i do say it takes away from his "aura"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it ABSOLUTELY diminishes is overall aura. How could anyone say differently? Did you guys forget what makes America...America? Fair or not it's the truth. Verlander may go down as a great but he will never be immortalized as an ALL TIME great with that WS record. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it ABSOLUTELY diminishes is overall aura. How could anyone say differently? Did you guys forget what makes America...America? Fair or not it's the truth. Verlander may go down as a great but he will never be immortalized as an ALL TIME great with that WS record. Sorry.

True but he has plenty of years ahead of him to turn it around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tigers don't sniff the World Series or even the playoffs without him. It's asinine to think a handful of games make a difference in the bigger picture.

Agree but I think what Blackout means is if Verlander retired with these numbers you would always have a portion of fans who would point to his WS numbers when debating him against say a Jack Morris or John Smoltz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree but I think what Blackout means is if Verlander retired with these numbers you would always have a portion of fans who would point to his WS numbers when debating him against say a Jack Morris or John Smoltz.

Well that portion of fans would be making a bad argument. Morris was very clutch, but Verlander will probably have a better career. I don't think Verlander will top Smoltz's resume though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree but I think what Blackout means is if Verlander retired with these numbers you would always have a portion of fans who would point to his WS numbers when debating him against say a Jack Morris or John Smoltz.

Well then he can't crap on Schilling then. Haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just my impression of him from what I've seen. He seems very satisfied with himself. I would be too I guess.

I always hate seeing people who are satisfied with themselves as well. Life is suffering!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tigers don't sniff the World Series or even the playoffs without him. It's asinine to think a handful of games make a difference in the bigger picture.

As it stands now I think it absolutely does. Does he have to be Koufax (0.95 ERA in 4 world series)? No, you can look at Randy Johnson, who went through a 0-6 postseason stretch, however Johnson also has a World Series MVP to his name. There will definitely be a blemish next to Verlander's name until he can redeem himself on the big stage. Does it hurt HOF chances, no, he's obviously a great pitcher, but I think it hurts his "aura" as an all time immortal. Seaver's only like 1-2 but has a, I think, 2.70 ERA. I'm not saying you need to be perfect but he's got to at least have 1 shining moment imo. Not always fair but I think it's true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands now I think it absolutely does. Does he have to be Koufax (0.95 ERA in 4 world series)? No, you can look at Randy Johnson, who went through a 0-6 postseason stretch, however Johnson also has a World Series MVP to his name. There will definitely be a blemish next to Verlander's name until he can redeem himself on the big stage. Does it hurt HOF chances, no, he's obviously a great pitcher, but I think it hurts his "aura" as an all time immortal. Seaver's only like 1-2 but has a, I think, 2.70 ERA. I'm not saying you need to be perfect but he's got to at least have 1 shining moment imo. Not always fair but I think it's true.

I disagree. Rings don't really mean much in baseball. If we were talking about a basketball player, you might have a point. Ted Williams never won a ring and was pretty bad in the one World Series he played in. He's still one of the best hitters of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.

I agree with wombat, it does not matter as much.

Ted Wlliams never won and he can make an argument for being the greatest ever. Ernie Banks. Griffey. Gwynn.

I think the dynamic might have shifted a tad, but unlike basketball where it is uber important, it is less so in baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with wombat, it does not matter as much.

Ted Wlliams never won and he can make an argument for being the greatest ever. Ernie Banks. Griffey. Gwynn.

I think the dynamic might have shifted a tad, but unlike basketball where it is uber important, it is less so in baseball.

Ruth, Mays, Aaron, Mantle, and Gehrig > Williams, Cobb, Banks, Griffey Jr and Gwynn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruth, Mays, Aaron, Mantle, and Gehrig > Williams, Cobb, Banks, Griffey Jr and Gwynn

Just when I think you cannot possibly be any dumber, you raise the bar. Congrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



×