RichardSeymour 1 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RichardSeymour 1 Posted June 27, 2005 Author Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maxman 540,061 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... It wasn't here. It wasn't there. Seymour wasn't right anywhere. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maxman 540,061 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... It wasn't here. It wasn't there. Seymour wasn't right anywhere. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
124 142,407 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
124 142,407 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... A lot of people said the same. The same with with Wade Miller - Pavano debate. Most of us just don't have the need to remind Yank fans when they are down about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Maybe it was here, maybe it was JI, but somewhere I got in a tussle with someone about Clement being about as good a pickup as Pavano. Anyone still want to tussle on that? I thought not. Anyway, the Skanks still have a stab at the playoffs, if they can acquire a few decent major leaguers to play defense and hit .275.... Heck, they can still win the division. I'm not laying down money that they will, but they can.... A lot of people said the same. The same with with Wade Miller - Pavano debate. Most of us just don't have the need to remind Yank fans when they are down about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
faba 118,231 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. The Yankees got the ace or so they thought in Johnson-Schmidt is having a terrible time this year so far also Quote Link to post Share on other sites
faba 118,231 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. The Yankees got the ace or so they thought in Johnson-Schmidt is having a terrible time this year so far also Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 The Yankees got the ace or so they thought in Johnson-Schmidt is having a terrible time this year so far also Schmidt was awful up until two starts ago. Since then though he has taken a shutout into the 9th in his last two starts. He still has lost 3-4 mph on his fast ball. The Giants asking price is 3 TOP prospects. Personally I think they are bluffing as Schmidt has a 11 mill option next year that they will not pick up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 The Yankees got the ace or so they thought in Johnson-Schmidt is having a terrible time this year so far also Schmidt was awful up until two starts ago. Since then though he has taken a shutout into the 9th in his last two starts. He still has lost 3-4 mph on his fast ball. The Giants asking price is 3 TOP prospects. Personally I think they are bluffing as Schmidt has a 11 mill option next year that they will not pick up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Gun Of Bavaria 208,706 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. No FB = No Hope for Schmidt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Gun Of Bavaria 208,706 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 We need an ace. Steinbrenner / Cashman seem to be interested in the Giants' Jason Schmidt. No FB = No Hope for Schmidt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Are you serious seymour? Clement is 9-1 but his era is nothing really great. Has he pitched far better than anybody expected including myself? YEA Has he pitched better than Pavano [thus far]?? YEA But Clement has gotten like 10 runs a game for christ sake, while Pavano hasn't gotten more than 5 runs in a single start in a very long time. And Clement is know to be a wussy choker, so lets see how Pavano and Clement fair in the playoffs, where everything REALLY counts as you and I know. Thats 1 of the main reasons I haven't bashed Wells this season. The man comes to pitch in the playoffs, he comes up big when it counts, thats all that matters. "We need an ace" Digging up Cy Young from the grave is alittle too late now. We have our ace, his name is Randy Johnson. Asking for an ace when you have Randy Johnson? I don't get it....have faith man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Are you serious seymour? Clement is 9-1 but his era is nothing really great. Has he pitched far better than anybody expected including myself? YEA Has he pitched better than Pavano [thus far]?? YEA But Clement has gotten like 10 runs a game for christ sake, while Pavano hasn't gotten more than 5 runs in a single start in a very long time. And Clement is know to be a wussy choker, so lets see how Pavano and Clement fair in the playoffs, where everything REALLY counts as you and I know. Thats 1 of the main reasons I haven't bashed Wells this season. The man comes to pitch in the playoffs, he comes up big when it counts, thats all that matters. "We need an ace" Digging up Cy Young from the grave is alittle too late now. We have our ace, his name is Randy Johnson. Asking for an ace when you have Randy Johnson? I don't get it....have faith man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jetfanmack 759 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Before the year, anyone who argued that Clement was a better pickup than Clement was delusional. Right now, if anyone wants to say that Pavano is pitching better than Clement is insane. Too bad for you guys, nobody is arguing the latter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jetfanmack 759 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Before the year, anyone who argued that Clement was a better pickup than Clement was delusional. Right now, if anyone wants to say that Pavano is pitching better than Clement is insane. Too bad for you guys, nobody is arguing the latter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Troll 97,541 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Are you serious seymour? Clement is 9-1 but his era is nothing really great. His ERA is under 4 in the big, bad American League. Clement is better than Pavano...he always has been. If you want to talk about a player getting no run support, then talk about how Clement would have won 20 games last year if the Cubs' offense hadn't went out and layed an egg everytime he stepped on the mound. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Troll 97,541 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Are you serious seymour? Clement is 9-1 but his era is nothing really great. His ERA is under 4 in the big, bad American League. Clement is better than Pavano...he always has been. If you want to talk about a player getting no run support, then talk about how Clement would have won 20 games last year if the Cubs' offense hadn't went out and layed an egg everytime he stepped on the mound. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Always has been? Maybe because your a cub fan. Take a look at last years numbers between Pavano and Clement and come back to me telling me Clement has always been better than Pavano Better stuff? yeah Better pitcher? no, not until this season he hasn't done anything to say he was better than Carl. And I'd still take Pavano over Clement, come playoff time Pavano has proven his worth with big time performances. While Clement has a stigma as being alittle wussy when the sh*t hits the fan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Always has been? Maybe because your a cub fan. Take a look at last years numbers between Pavano and Clement and come back to me telling me Clement has always been better than Pavano Better stuff? yeah Better pitcher? no, not until this season he hasn't done anything to say he was better than Carl. And I'd still take Pavano over Clement, come playoff time Pavano has proven his worth with big time performances. While Clement has a stigma as being alittle wussy when the sh*t hits the fan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Before the year, anyone who argued that Clement was a better pickup than Clement was delusional. Right now, if anyone wants to say that Pavano is pitching better than Clement is insane. Too bad for you guys, nobody is arguing the latter. Anyone who had watched Clement over the last few years prior to this season will tell you his stuff is head and shoulders better than Pavano's. It was always just a matter of Clement harnessing his pitches and having a bullpen that didn't blow his wins. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Before the year, anyone who argued that Clement was a better pickup than Clement was delusional. Right now, if anyone wants to say that Pavano is pitching better than Clement is insane. Too bad for you guys, nobody is arguing the latter. Anyone who had watched Clement over the last few years prior to this season will tell you his stuff is head and shoulders better than Pavano's. It was always just a matter of Clement harnessing his pitches and having a bullpen that didn't blow his wins. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Anyone who had watched Clement over the last few years prior to this season will tell you his stuff is head and shoulders better than Pavano's. It was always just a matter of Clement harnessing his pitches and having a bullpen that didn't blow his wins. No sh*t sherlock! Did you not read the rest of my post where I said Clement has better stuff?? LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Anyone who had watched Clement over the last few years prior to this season will tell you his stuff is head and shoulders better than Pavano's. It was always just a matter of Clement harnessing his pitches and having a bullpen that didn't blow his wins. No sh*t sherlock! Did you not read the rest of my post where I said Clement has better stuff?? LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 No Sh#t sherlock! Did you not read the rest of my post where I said Clement has better stuff?? LOL We were posting at the same time. And Womack was out sport. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GimmeShelter 21,641 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 No Sh#t sherlock! Did you not read the rest of my post where I said Clement has better stuff?? LOL We were posting at the same time. And Womack was out sport. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Troll 97,541 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Always has been? Maybe because your a cub fan. Take a look at last years numbers between Pavano and Clement and come back to me telling me Clement has always been better than Pavano Better stuff? yeah Better pitcher? no, not until this season he hasn't done anything to say he was better than Carl. And I'd still take Pavano over Clement, come playoff time Pavano has proven his worth with big time performances. While Clement has a stigma as being alittle wussy when the Sh#t hits the fan. Clement's ERA the previous 3 years: 3.60, 4.11, 3.68 Pavano's ERA the previous 3 years: 5.16, 4.30, 3.00 (contract year) Who's better, again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Troll 97,541 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Always has been? Maybe because your a cub fan. Take a look at last years numbers between Pavano and Clement and come back to me telling me Clement has always been better than Pavano Better stuff? yeah Better pitcher? no, not until this season he hasn't done anything to say he was better than Carl. And I'd still take Pavano over Clement, come playoff time Pavano has proven his worth with big time performances. While Clement has a stigma as being alittle wussy when the Sh#t hits the fan. Clement's ERA the previous 3 years: 3.60, 4.11, 3.68 Pavano's ERA the previous 3 years: 5.16, 4.30, 3.00 (contract year) Who's better, again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Ok Troll, I'm gonna go get the whooping stick I'll be right back Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Ok Troll, I'm gonna go get the whooping stick I'll be right back Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RichardSeymour 1 Posted June 27, 2005 Author Share Posted June 27, 2005 The Troll makes a good point, and this is a reason I always distrusted Pavano while grudgingly accepting the notion that he was the #1 FA on the market..... he was basically a one year wonder with enough pedigree that everyone went ga ga over him when he had a good year. Clement meanwhile has had the "great stuff but can't quite put it together" label for awhile.... and while he's been enduring that he's quietly been a reliable and very good pitcher for a while now. Not a #1 guy, but a d*** fine #3 and a solid #2.... you can't say the same of Pavano for more than one of the last 4 years (including this one. BTW, congrats on Jorge Posada not being a complete corpse, and likewise congrats on having a live one in Cano.... even if he's being massively overrated by Skanks fans at the moment due to their not having anything else to hype. He reminds me a bit of Soriano---- talented hitter for his age, pretty good offensively for 2nd base. Weak defensively, horrible, horrible, horrible walk rate. But hey, Soriano had a pretty good year 2, so I can forgive you for being excited and hoping lightning strikes twice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RichardSeymour 1 Posted June 27, 2005 Author Share Posted June 27, 2005 The Troll makes a good point, and this is a reason I always distrusted Pavano while grudgingly accepting the notion that he was the #1 FA on the market..... he was basically a one year wonder with enough pedigree that everyone went ga ga over him when he had a good year. Clement meanwhile has had the "great stuff but can't quite put it together" label for awhile.... and while he's been enduring that he's quietly been a reliable and very good pitcher for a while now. Not a #1 guy, but a d*** fine #3 and a solid #2.... you can't say the same of Pavano for more than one of the last 4 years (including this one. BTW, congrats on Jorge Posada not being a complete corpse, and likewise congrats on having a live one in Cano.... even if he's being massively overrated by Skanks fans at the moment due to their not having anything else to hype. He reminds me a bit of Soriano---- talented hitter for his age, pretty good offensively for 2nd base. Weak defensively, horrible, horrible, horrible walk rate. But hey, Soriano had a pretty good year 2, so I can forgive you for being excited and hoping lightning strikes twice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barton 66,855 Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 The great Matt Clement has a career era of 4.25 Carl Pavano has a career era of 4.26 Troll, you cannot count either pitchers 2005 era in this discussion. Wait till the end of the season and I bet Pavano will have proven his worth and statistically come close to Clements era. The thing where you're wrong is you said Clement was ALWAYS BETTER than Carl Pavano..........YOU ARE DEAD WRONG. How was Clement possibly better than Pavano last season? 2004 Carl Pavano 222.1 innings pitched 49 walks 139 strikeouts 3.00 era Matt Clement 181 innings pitched 77 walks 190 strikeouts 3.68 era Clement has yet to record a season in which he pitches over 200 innings with an era under 4. So tell me troll, how Pavano wasn't better than Clement last season?? I mean, you said Clement was ALWAYS better than Pavano.............. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.