Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Maxman

Baseball is here...

Recommended Posts

That's one of the key stats for any pitcher at any time throughout the history of baseball. I'm not cherry picking something ridiculous and random. I picked the major stat of which most people judge pitchers by. Let's not forget that his ERA is even higher when you consider him as just a starter.

 

Congratulations on your #2 starter having a lower ERA than the Yankees #5 starter.  I guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They both came up at the same time. The point is is that if Hughes was good he wouldn't be a fifth starter and the Yankees wouldn't be hoping and praying that Pettite and Kuroda don't fall apart. You're missing the point, then again, you're just a potato.

 

That's your point?  That if Phil Hughes were better, he would be better?  Or that all guys that come up at the same time are supposed to be equal? How astute. 

 

They are what they are.  Hughes is counted on only to be a 5/6 starter at this point.  Nothing else.  This comparison is beyond stupid.

 

Or you can stick with your bizarre logic.  John Lackey and CC Sabathia came up to the majors around the same time, too.  You know what?  If John Lackey was as good as CC Sabathia, he wouldn't suck!

Edited by JetPotato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're so dense. Hughes and Buchholz were compared because they came up around the same time, not by me but by proud Yankees fans crowing and beating their chests. A few year later now and Phil Hughes isn't the second coming and he's actually bordering awful. So, yeah, why don't you go back and take a look at threads in the archives and get some facts straight.

 

You brought it up.  No one else did.  If you want to prove that happened however many years ago, that's on you.

 

While you're at it, why don't you see if you can find all the "Garciaparra is better than Jeter" posts.  Since that's exactly the same thing, only real, and meaningful.

Edited by JetPotato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure this board existed when Nomar was playing. Nomar was a good player for a number of years and injuries robbed him of what might have been. The only thing Nomar was better at was hitting for power. Jeter was the better defender, stole way more bases, etc. jeter's best season was better than Nomar's as far as WAR is concerned. I don't think you'd get much of an argument on who was the better player. The better hitter is much closer.

I did bring it up and you responded so you ought to be ready to defend your position.

 

I don't really have a position to defend, other than the fact that this is a stupid comparison.  In  fact, I even congratulated you on your little self-created argument with yourself.  

 

If you want to boast about a #2 starter having a better ERA than a #5 starter, have at it.  But it's really no different than a "Hey guys, I just drank pee!  But at least it wasn't poo!"

Edited by JetPotato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were both considered top of the rotation guys coming up. What are you failing to understand about that fact?

 

Newsflash: no one cares what guys were once "considered" many years ago.  What matters is what they ARE.  Hence the Garciaparra-Jeter comment, which you also completely botched.  

 

Fact remains that you created a fictional argument to try to boast about something completely unimpressive.  The positive for you here is when you argue with yourself, you always win.  But do yourself a favor: the next time you want to draw comparisons, do it with comparable players.  Cleanup hitter vs. cleanup hitter.  2nd baseman vs. 2nd baseman.  Closer vs. closer.  Not #2 vs. #5 starter.  It sounds ridiculous, and it doesn't make anyone envy the laptop thief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL at you. Seriously. You inject yourself in a conversation that you admittedly knew nothing about and didn't care about and are now trying to swing the argument to your vantage point which in this context is wrong. I can compare two guys who were supposed to be top of the rotation guys on rival teams that came up about the same time. That makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. You also bring up laptops like that adds anything to the argument at all.

I guess we shouldn't compare the careers of Ken O'Brien and Dan Marino because of what they turned out to be. That logic is so flawed and idiotic.

I suppose at this point you should just politely excuse yourself from this conversation.

 

Actually, it's clearly you that doesn't understand context.

 

Even by the flaw of your your own analogy, you prove this.  No one, not one single Jets fan on earth (not even Ken O'Brien's mother) would argue the case that today Ken O'Brien is a comparable QB to Dan Marino.  The fact that they were drafted in the same year is worthy of discussion, and something we point to as yet another Jets draft mistake, but it has absolutely no bearing on the discussion that one is a retired Hall of Famer and one is just retired.  

 

This started when you asked stupidly "are Yankees fans still arguing that Hughes is better than Laptop" or whatever.  The answer is no, we are not drawing comparisons here in 2013 between our #5 starter and your #2.  You are doing that, and it's making you look more ridiculous with each passing post.  

 

So no, I won't be politely doing anything except laughing at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hughes vs Buchholz is a valid comparison. Where they are in their respective rotations really has nothing to do with anything. 

 

No, no it isn't.  Solid argument though, lots of references.

 

They weren't traded for each other.  They weren't drafted in the same year.  They're not from the same state.  They're not the same age.  They aren't similar style pitchers.  They have different roles on their team.  They aren't similar in any way, shape or form.  

 

It's an illogical comparison used in a weak attempt at boasting.  Following the (lack of) thinking here, I can compare any 2 players in major league baseball, based solely on a misconception that they're somehow comparable.  It's a desperate attempt to pick one Red Sox player, saddle him up to his supposed Yankee twin, and say "my guy is better".  It's absurd, and sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is your best post ever. 

 

Do you want to know why CC made the original post?   It was discussed around here.  Ad nauseam.  $hit....props to MadMike he actually made some half decent arguments for Hughes that the gap is not as big as RSN might think.

 

And a little clue CC was joking...he added a "ha ha" after it.

 

You are literally clueless.

 

If it was discussed here ad nauseum, that doesn't make it any less of a stupid comparison.

 

But like I said, congrats to RSN for having a #2 starter with an ERA better than a #5, even though the gap isn't as big as thought  by some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gap is a full run and widening. Just give it up already. You look bad in this.

 

Says the guy talking about ERA.  LOL.

 

By the way, it's pretty difficult to give up an argument I'm not even making, no matter how desperate you are to engage it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...