Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Otter

Halladay vs. Santana

Who is the best starter in baseball?  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Who is the best starter in baseball?



Recommended Posts

I'm sorry that you don't get that there is a big difference between pitching in the NL and pitching in the AL. Even if you foolishly overlook the fact that the lineups are deeper and more potent in the AL, even common sense should tell you that the DH rule alone makes it tougher. It seems everyone in baseball - players, managers, agents, owners, fans, etc. - understands the difference except for a handful of homerific Mets fans who can not accept facts that they take as a slight against their team somehow.

Yeah, Barry Zito sure proved that ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how the poll is tied. Did Guido vote multiple times?

Santana is the best starting pitcher in baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets look at this in a very stupid manner-numbers alone, to quell Guido's AL bias:

The average AL team scored 775 runs last year

The average NL team scored 734 runs last year

That is a difference, on average, of 41 runs

If you take 41 runs by team, that means an AL team, on average scored .25 more runs/game than the NL counterparts.

Johan made 34 starts last year. Let's be totally cruel and give him an extra .25 runs per game (unfair because he is not an average pitcher, and did not pitch full games in order to accrue that .25 runs)-that gives him an extra 9 runs (rounded up from 8.5).

We will even say all those runs were earned runs.

That makes his era jump up to 2.88, in the cruelest set of circumstances.

More than Halladay's 2.78, but Halladay does not offset the things Santana brings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that doesn't make sense.....only because if i'm starting a team i'm not worried about 15 years down the road. that's just too far ahead to be looking. i'm looking for dominance for the next 5-7 years and, in that case, i'm taking pedro over anybody in the game today. when pedro was on he was one of the best pitchers ever to play. and the fact he did it all in the steroids era is even more impressive.

*sigh*

you are only talking 15 years down the road because you know how Pedro and Maddux health has been...

If I am looking at them physically, I know a guy like Halladay will have a less likely change of hurting himself and require less maintenance (i.e. inning limits, pitch counts) than someone with Santana's body type.

How this is a knock to you makes no sense to me.....

I would take someone I can build my franchise around and someone I know my money is going the furthest with. I know a guy like Halladay will give me the most important stats I can get from a pitcher innings and wins....Pedro needs to be coddled a bit...which taxes my bullpen...no so with a physical horse like Halladay.

Santana is best, but if I am starting a franchise I am thinking about the life of the contract...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see a comparison of the two against teams over .500 and against the AL East..

I still say Johan is the better pitcher, but Johan is now in the NL and he pitched a ton of games against the Royals who stink, the Tigers who stunk for years, the Indians who were on the downslide, and the White Sox who were inconsistent...

Halladay pitched against the Yankees and the Red Sox...

a little tougher..I would say....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What don't you understand about the term "right now"?

What are you talking about?? As good as Santana is, he can't pitch in 2 leagues as once. He has already prove he can dominate in the AL, and he is dominating in the NL now. You continue to give some of the most insane logic to your argument. First it was, well "Halladay has more complete games" now it is "Santana dominates in the weaker NL" What do you expect him to do, he has already proved he can dominate in every possible league. It is not his fault the Mets traded for him. If they did not, he would dominate in the AL. Why do I know this? I know this because he was the best pitcher in the AL when he was pitching in the AL. I feel like I am debating a door know. No offense to you. I like door knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What are you talking about?? As good as Santana is, he can't pitch in 2 leagues as once. He has already prove he can dominate in the AL, and he is dominating in the NL now. You continue to give some of the most insane logic to your argument. First it was, well "Halladay has more complete games" now it is "Santana dominates in the weaker NL" What do you expect him to do, he has already proved he can dominate in every possible league. It is not his fault the Mets traded for him. If they did not, he would dominate in the AL. Why do I know this? I know this because he was the best pitcher in the AL when he was pitching in the AL. I feel like I am debating a door know. No offense to you. I like door knows.

I think he is trying to justify the Yankees passing on Santana when all they would had to give up was the immortal Phil Hughes.

Scoreboard:

Santana 20 wins

Hughes 1 win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he is trying to justify the Yankees passing on Santana when all they would had to give up was the immortal Phil Hughes.

Scoreboard:

Santana 20 wins

Hughes 1 win

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*sigh*

you are only talking 15 years down the road because you know how Pedro and Maddux health has been...

If I am looking at them physically, I know a guy like Halladay will have a less likely change of hurting himself and require less maintenance (i.e. inning limits, pitch counts) than someone with Santana's body type.

How this is a knock to you makes no sense to me.....

I would take someone I can build my franchise around and someone I know my money is going the furthest with. I know a guy like Halladay will give me the most important stats I can get from a pitcher innings and wins....Pedro needs to be coddled a bit...which taxes my bullpen...no so with a physical horse like Halladay.

Santana is best, but if I am starting a franchise I am thinking about the life of the contract...

no i guess i'm just from a different school. if you tell me i'm going to get 9 of the most dominant years form a starting pitche rin history, but then he's gonna break down.....or i can have a pitcher who is less dominant but will last me 15 years.....i'm still gonna take the 9 insanely dominant years. if you wanna know the truth if i'm building a team i think my first 2 picks are a lights out 1-2 punch for my rotation. anyway, pedro has a few CG;s to his credit as well.....he had one season with as many as 13. and he had many season at or above 200 innings, so calling him a tax on your bullpen isn't quite accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no i guess i'm just from a different school. if you tell me i'm going to get 9 of the most dominant years form a starting pitche rin history, but then he's gonna break down.....or i can have a pitcher who is less dominant but will last me 15 years.....i'm still gonna take the 9 insanely dominant years. if you wanna know the truth if i'm building a team i think my first 2 picks are a lights out 1-2 punch for my rotation. anyway, pedro has a few CG;s to his credit as well.....he had one season with as many as 13. and he had many season at or above 200 innings, so calling him a tax on your bullpen isn't quite accurate.

well, I am thinking over the course of a season, or even a few seasons...

a guy who can work like a horse helps every aspect of your pitching staff, gives your bullpen more rest, which in turn means you don't lean too much on your #4 or #5 guys to pitch enough innings so to protect your pen.

That is why I like Sabathia for the Yankees....I think the guy can consistanty pitch 7 to 8 innings...which helps because then a guy like Joba or even Pettitte who seem to top out at 6 innings won't get forced to pitch another inning because on monday your pen covered 3 or 4 innings...to me little things like that matter.

Having said that I would take Santana on the Yanks over Sabathia if given the option. Although the overall impact of the two on the team are of nominal difference, yeah, Santana would probably have a better ERA but K/9 would be about the same, Santana may win 1 or 2 more games and Sabathia may pitch more innings....probably a wash when all is said and done.

I just like the idea of having a guy like Halladay first because of his impact on the rest of the pitching staff...I don't know what positive impact Santana would have on his bullpen...but that is also a product of being in the NL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What don't you understand about the term "right now"?

yeah but seriously......this "right now" would make a whole lot more sense if johan wasn't owning the way he is right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*sigh*

you are only talking 15 years down the road because you know how Pedro and Maddux health has been...

If I am looking at them physically, I know a guy like Halladay will have a less likely change of hurting himself and require less maintenance (i.e. inning limits, pitch counts) than someone with Santana's body type.

How this is a knock to you makes no sense to me.....

I would take someone I can build my franchise around and someone I know my money is going the furthest with. I know a guy like Halladay will give me the most important stats I can get from a pitcher innings and wins....Pedro needs to be coddled a bit...which taxes my bullpen...no so with a physical horse like Halladay.

Santana is best, but if I am starting a franchise I am thinking about the life of the contract...

The thing is Halladay has proven less durable, look at the last 5 years.....Santana 168 starts and Halladay 136 starts.....Santana has had more starts in each of the last 5 years......

In the past 3 seasons Halladay threw for 691 innings while Santana threw for 687 innnings.....4 stinking innings in 3 years.....While Halladay may go a little deeper in games Santana shows up for every start....Santana has not had less than 33 starts the last 5 years, how much more durable, reliable and consistant can a starting pitcher be....

The last 2 months of 2008 when the bullpen might be showing signs of overuse Santana went deeper into games than Halladay so it was Halladay who taxed his bullpen more than Santana.....

The other big plus for Santana is he has proven he can be dominant in New York, Halladay has pitched in stress free Toronto his whole career and who knows what he would do on the big stage....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*sigh*

you are only talking 15 years down the road because you know how Pedro and Maddux health has been...

If I am looking at them physically, I know a guy like Halladay will have a less likely change of hurting himself and require less maintenance (i.e. inning limits, pitch counts) than someone with Santana's body type.

How this is a knock to you makes no sense to me.....

I would take someone I can build my franchise around and someone I know my money is going the furthest with. I know a guy like Halladay will give me the most important stats I can get from a pitcher innings and wins....Pedro needs to be coddled a bit...which taxes my bullpen...no so with a physical horse like Halladay.

Santana is best, but if I am starting a franchise I am thinking about the life of the contract...

I don't where people get the idea that pitchers with Santana's body type are any more likely to break down the pitchers like Halladay. There are plenty of guys similar to each that have broken down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would love to see a comparison of the two against teams over .500 and against the AL East..

I still say Johan is the better pitcher, but Johan is now in the NL and he pitched a ton of games against the Royals who stink, the Tigers who stunk for years, the Indians who were on the downslide, and the White Sox who were inconsistent...

Halladay pitched against the Yankees and the Red Sox...

a little tougher..I would say....

True but Halladay would also have a better book on those teams.....he'd have to with the number of times he faced them and a pitcher of his class should have better numbers against teams he knows very well. That doesn't always play out though.

The Rays and Orioles also stunk for years and while Halladay has a lower ERA against the Yankees, Johan still went 4-1 with a 3.15 ERA against them. Johan also has a much better ERA against the Red Sox.

As for the quality of teams Santana faced in his divison, the Tigers went to the WS and the WSox won a WS while Johan was pitching against them. Cleveland also dismissed the Yankees in the post season in another season in which Johan pitched in their division. That leads me to believe that the division is not exactly the little sisters of the poor. As for the NL, Johan has never lost to the Phils and has a 2.44 ERA against what I think can be considered a pretty tough line-up. The Phils also are the defending WS Champs despite coming from the NL.

Johan also has a HIGHER ERA against the weak Royals then he does the Yanks or Red Sox so as you can see, cherry picking stats is fruitless and can be used to give either pitcher a advantage.

Bottom line is they are both great. Johans career body of work just comes out on top when you look at their complete stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What don't you understand about the term "right now"?

Right now Johan has a ERA under 1.

Right now Johan has a ERA under 1.

Right now Johan has a ERA under 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BUMP

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K

Santana 11 G, 7-3 2.00 ERA 1.11 WHIP 72 IP 21 BB 89 K

I take the dominant 7.7 IP/Start over the dominant 6.5 IP/Start every day of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BUMP

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K

Santana 11 G, 7-3 2.00 ERA 1.11 WHIP 72 IP 21 BB 89 K

I take the dominant 7.7 IP/Start over the dominant 6.5 IP/Start every day of the week.

What does that say about Joba Chamberlain then? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BUMP

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K

Santana 11 G, 7-3 2.00 ERA 1.11 WHIP 72 IP 21 BB 89 K

I take the dominant 7.7 IP/Start over the dominant 6.5 IP/Start every day of the week.

Halladay's number are by far better than Santana's. It isn't even close look at that. Half as many walks, just as many k's lower whip. The only thing santana has is a better ERA which doesn't matter when his team can't even win with him on the mound. 7-3 as opposed to 10-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Halladay's number are by far better than Santana's. It isn't even close look at that. Half as many walks, just as many k's lower whip. The only thing santana has is a better ERA which doesn't matter when his team can't even win with him on the mound. 7-3 as opposed to 10-1

I would take either of them, and this is splitting hairs.

Santana is younger than Halliday, so that is who I would prefer to have on my team. As well, he is signed long term, which Halliday is not.

Can't lose with either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Halladay's number are by far better than Santana's. It isn't even close look at that. Half as many walks, just as many k's lower whip. The only thing santana has is a better ERA which doesn't matter when his team can't even win with him on the mound. 7-3 as opposed to 10-1

when halladay keeps it up for 6-7 years in a row like santana has then we can talk about who has the better numbers......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
when halladay keeps it up for 6-7 years in a row like santana has then we can talk about who has the better numbers......

LOL. Halladay didn't just get good this year because he's finally getting the attention he deserves. What is your problem with giving this guy his due? It's clear to everyone outside of the Mets fan circle that right now he is the best pitcher in baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Halladay didn't just get good this year because he's finally getting the attention he deserves. What is your problem with giving this guy his due? It's clear to everyone outside of the Mets fan circle that right now he is the best pitcher in baseball.

It may actually be clear outside of everyone in Yankee fan circle that Santana is the best in baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little late to this thread, but in an effort to put to bed the mind-numbing argument of "strength of league", will cite the wonderful statistic known as ERA+.

For the uninitiated, adjusted ERA+ is a relative measure of a pitcher's performance against the league average and is ballpark-adjusted, to remove the advantage/disadvantage of playing in a pitcher's/hitter's park. Thus, if the league-average ERA in the NL is a half run better than the AL, ERA+ will remove that advantage for a fair head-to-head comparison across leagues. An ERA+ of 100 is considered to be average, with a higher number an indicator of better performance.

For their careers, Santana currently has an ERA+ of 146, while Halladay's is 133. Halladay has never led his league in ERA+, while Santana led the AL in that category 3 times (and is currently leading the NL this year). Santana also is currently tied for the 4th best ERA+ of all-time (with Walter Johnson and a few others), behind only Mariano (a ridiculous 199), Pedro (154) and Lefty Grove (148).

The argument of Halladay being a better pitcher for going deeper into games is weak at best. He is an extreme groundball pitcher (57%) that doesn't strike out a ton of batters (6.49 K/9). Obviously, he is going to use less pitches that a guy who is a dominant strikeout pitcher (9.3 K/9). Arguing that Santana relies more on others (his bullpen) than Halladay, because the latter pitches deeper into games is moronic, when Halladay relies on his infield defense to put away all those ground balls he induces.

I certainly wouldn't mind either one on my team, but being that I'm especially partial to pitchers that miss bats (don't leave anything to chance), I would take Santana in a heartbeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Halladay didn't just get good this year because he's finally getting the attention he deserves. What is your problem with giving this guy his due? It's clear to everyone outside of the Mets fan circle that right now he is the best pitcher in baseball.

Halladay might be a better "stopper", due to the fact that he's an innings-eater, but he's clearly not a better pitcher than Santana. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may actually be clear outside of everyone in Yankee fan circle that Santana is the best in baseball.

You're ridiculous. Yankee fans aren't like you guys. We could care less about the other team across town. Believe me, I would much, much prefer it if the Mets had the best pitcher in baseball instead of one of our division rivals.

I actually feel bad for you guys that you're this insecure about your team that you can't muster up the ability to say that your guy is the second best pitcher in baseball. Oh, the horror. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Halladay didn't just get good this year because he's finally getting the attention he deserves. What is your problem with giving this guy his due? It's clear to everyone outside of the Mets fan circle that right now he is the best pitcher in baseball.

you see the difference is that i don't go by such a small sample size and decide who is the best pitcher in baseball. right now halladay is having a comparable seaosn to santana, so you'r eready to anoint him the bestr in baseball. it's only 1/3 of a season.....i think halladay is a great pitcher, and i'd love to have him on the mets. i just think that santana has proven, year after year, that he's the best in the game. and if you really want to go by the current season's stats....well sorry but your boy halladay isn't even the best pitcher in his league right now, cause greinke is having a better season than him, and it's not even really debatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BUMP

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K

Santana 11 G, 7-3 2.00 ERA 1.11 WHIP 72 IP 21 BB 89 K

I take the dominant 7.7 IP/Start over the dominant 6.5 IP/Start every day of the week.

see the problem with your argument is you're judging these guys by 1/3 of a current season. let's look at the bigger picture.

last 3 full years (i'd go back further but halladay was hurt and couldn't even take the mound for his team for a good part of those seaosns, while santana was still busy putting up 200+ inning for his team):

halladay: 691 innings pitched

santana: 687 innings pitched

both of them threw right around the same number of innings per year. and like i said, if you wanna go by this year only (which is the only way your argument comes close to working) well then greinke gets the nod anyway.......so you still don't win....:D

Edited by neckdemon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your boy halladay isn't even the best pitcher in his league right now, cause greinke is having a better season than him, and it's not even really debatable.

Agreed. If you're going to argue based on year-to-date, even after Greinke's last start (which was poor), his numbers are far better than Halladay's:

Greinke 12 G, 8-2 1.55 ERA 0.966 WHIP 87 IP 13 BB 91 K 5 CG

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K 3 CG

Even further, based on Bill James' gamescore statistic, Greinke has had 3 starts better than Halladay's finest start of the season (the SHO vs. KC).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're ridiculous. Yankee fans aren't like you guys. We could care less about the other team across town. Believe me, I would much, much prefer it if the Mets had the best pitcher in baseball instead of one of our division rivals.

I actually feel bad for you guys that you're this insecure about your team that you can't muster up the ability to say that your guy is the second best pitcher in baseball. Oh, the horror. :rolleyes:

Funny thing is you've been proven again and again on this thread about how wrong you are about the accomplishments of the two. The only thing you've brought up repeatedly is how Halladay could go longer in games. That's important, but so is a lot of other aspects of pitching. Halladay has never dominated the way Santana has, a third of the season doesn't equate a better pitcher. It's kind of funny how you make fun of Met fans, when your jealousy comes from the fact that the Yankees don't have him and refused to part with the great Phil Hughes Ian Kennedy combo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. If you're going to argue based on year-to-date, even after Greinke's last start (which was poor), his numbers are far better than Halladay's:

Greinke 12 G, 8-2 1.55 ERA 0.966 WHIP 87 IP 13 BB 91 K 5 CG

Halladay 13 G, 10-1 2.52 ERA 1.02 WHIP 100 IP 12 BB 88 K 3 CG

Even further, based on Bill James' gamescore statistic, Greinke has had 3 starts better than Halladay's finest start of the season (the SHO vs. KC).

where do you find individual game scores? or did you do the math yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
where do you find individual game scores? or did you do the math yourself?

No, I'm not quite that pathetic...

They're listed under Game Logs on each player's page on baseball-reference.com.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
see the problem with your argument is you're judging these guys by 1/3 of a current season. let's look at the bigger picture.

last 3 full years (i'd go back further but halladay was hurt and couldn't even take the mound for his team for a good part of those seaosns, while santana was still busy putting up 200+ inning for his team):

halladay: 691 innings pitched

santana: 687 innings pitched

both of them threw right around the same number of innings per year. and like i said, if you wanna go by this year only (which is the only way your argument comes close to working) well then greinke gets the nod anyway.......so you still don't win....:D

Please. I already proved to you Halladay was better last season too earlier in this thread about a month ago. You also seem to always conveniently forget that AL pitcher stats can't be directly compared directly to NL stats as one is a much, much tougher league to pitch in.

Talk about track record all you want. Pedro Martinez has a better track record than Zach Greinke. Doesn't even remotely mean he's a better pitcher than him right now.

But whatever. Try to convince yourself that if you had you still wouldn't have made the playoffs last year if you had Halladay instead of Santana. You're still wrong. When your starter goes deeper into games, your bullpen doesn't even get the chance to blow it for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny thing is you've been proven again and again on this thread about how wrong you are about the accomplishments of the two. The only thing you've brought up repeatedly is how Halladay could go longer in games. That's important, but so is a lot of other aspects of pitching. Halladay has never dominated the way Santana has, a third of the season doesn't equate a better pitcher. It's kind of funny how you make fun of Met fans, when your jealousy comes from the fact that the Yankees don't have him and refused to part with the great Phil Hughes Ian Kennedy combo.

I haven't brought up the Yankees once. That's all you. How do you not understand that calling Santana the 2nd best pitcher in baseball is not an insult? Only in the twisted world of a bitter, jealous fan who needs validation from another is that the case.

And when you say Halladay has never dominated, it makes me realize even more how much time I'm wasting with you. It is quite obvious from that statement that you have never watched him pitch on even a remotely consistent basis, if EVER. Highlights on Sportscenter don't count. Watch him pitch full games. He's been dominating for years now. I'll save my discussion for people who actually have a leg to stand on in this argument.

Thanks. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

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