Halladay vs. Santana

[Scott Dierking]

Come on. Come with something stronger than that.

They also chose a closer with a history of arm worries over Tim Lincecum. And what do you think about their selection of Sizemore over Beltran? Hmm?

I'd say they have abetter knowledge base than you or I.

Of course, you can never admit you are wrong, so it seems.

[Blackout]

DID I JUST SEE SOMEONE SAY HALLADAY HAD JUST AS MANY K'S WITHOUT THEM MENTIONING THE 28 MORE INNINGS PART? LOLZ hilarious

[Guido Monzino]

So your whole point is Halladay is better because of the last season and a third. Despite overwhelming evidence that your stat says Santana has been better over the last 4.

That's not the conversation. The conversation is who is a better pitcher right now. Not 4 years ago. 4 years ago Pedro Martinez had top 5 numbers. No one would say he's top 4 now. Again, as I requested, try and keep up.

[Guido Monzino]

I'd say they have abetter knowledge base than you or I.

Of course, you can never admit you are wrong, so it seems.

I gladly admit I'm wrong. When I'm wrong. But sorry, a little poll conducted on a Jets message board or by a handful of guys by SI is not enough to convince me that 7 shutout innings is better than 8.

[Scott Dierking]

I gladly admit I'm wrong. When I'm wrong. But sorry, a little poll conducted on a Jets message board or by a handful of guys by SI is not enough to convince me that 7 shutout innings is better than 8.

Scouts and Executives know a little more about the sport than you, sorry.

Originally, you said it was just Met fans who made the Santana claim. That kinda blew up on ya, so you discredit them

Yikes

[Guido Monzino]

Scouts and Executives know a little more about the sport than you, sorry.

Originally, you said it was just Met fans who made the Santana claim. That kinda blew up on ya, so you discredit them

Yikes

Show me evidence that those scouts and executives aren't Mets scouts and executives.

[Guido Monzino]

Scouts and Executives know a little more about the sport than you, sorry.

Originally, you said it was just Met fans who made the Santana claim. That kinda blew up on ya, so you discredit them

Yikes

One more thing about your little poll: Steve Philips was once a major league GM.

You put too much stock into the expertise of "scouts and executives".

Side story that this reminds me of. I know a kid who was just hired out of law school to scout for a major league team out of law school. He's never been to a major league baseball game. But his dad is friends with the scouting director.

[JohnnyHector]

First, care to provide a link to your stat?

baseball-reference.com under Game Logs. If you click on the first and last game, it sums the statistics from all games. I can't directly link to it, but I can assure you that it's not a fabricated figure.

Second, explain to me how a guy with twice as many walks as another guy throws the same amount of strikes.

Are you serious, or was your goal to make an ass of yourself with this comment?

If you walk someone on a 3-2 count, your strike percentage is the same as if you get someone to put a ball in play on a 2-0 count. And you do realize that a foul ball is considered a strike as well, don't you? So, a guy can walk a batter during a 13-pitch AB and still have a better strike percentage than a guy who K's a batter on a 2-2 count.

Bill James, look out... here comes Guido.

[Guido Monzino]

A third thing about the SI poll. It's pointless. The poll is off topic. They were asked "who would you start your franchise with?" Not "Who is currently the best?" There is a difference. This is the reason you see so many young names on the list. Santana gets a nudge in the SI poll because he is younger than Halladay. It's why Papelbon is on there over Rivera. It's why you won't address the Beltran issue. So again, come with something related to the topic at hand:

Who is the best pitcher in baseball right now

[Guido Monzino]

baseball-reference.com under Game Logs. If you click on the first and last game, it sums the statistics from all games. I can't directly link to it, but I can assure you that it's not a fabricated figure.

Are you serious, or was your goal to make an ass of yourself with this comment?

If you walk someone on a 3-2 count, your strike percentage is the same as if you get someone to put a ball in play on a 2-0 count. And you do realize that a foul ball is considered a strike as well, don't you? So, a guy can walk a batter during a 13-pitch AB and still have a better strike percentage than a guy who K's a batter on a 2-2 count.

Bill James, look out... here comes Guido.

Hey smart guy. Explain to me why Halladay only averages three more pitches than Santana, yet gets more than an inning more out of it. How is that not more efficient? Please. And you know that is the point of this. Not some hypothetical count scenario.

[JohnnyHector]

Hey smart guy. Explain to me why Halladay only averages three more pitches than Santana, yet gets more than an inning more out of it. How is that not more efficient? Please. And you know that is the point of this.

It's quite simple... Halladay's game is to induce ground balls, which can happen early in a count. Santana, as a result of averaging almost 3 more K/9, utilizes more pitches per AB. All strikeout pitchers run higher pitch counts, as it's inherent to that style.

Your asinine comment that I answered was:

explain to me how a guy with twice as many walks as another guy throws the same amount of strikes.

[JohnnyHector]

Not some hypothetical count scenario.

Now that you edited your post, I'll answer this...

My hypothetical count scenarios were to underscore how dumb it was for you to ask how Santana and Halladay throw an equal percentage of strikes.

[RutgersJetFan]

It's quite simple... Halladay's game is to induce ground balls, which can happen early in a count. Santana, as a result of averaging almost 3 more K/9, utilizes more pitches per AB. All strikeout pitchers run higher pitch counts, as it's inherent to that style.

Your asinine comment that I answered was:

This is literally the 3rd or 4th time you've explained this, at some point you have to concede that this is just a fruitless effort.

On a side-note, you'll be happy to know that I sent that one post to my buddy who's made similar claims about Halladay, and his exact response was: "Well then, I stand corrected."

[Guido Monzino]

It's quite simple... Halladay's game is to induce ground balls, which can happen early in a count. Santana, as a result of averaging almost 3 more K/9, utilizes more pitches per AB. All strikeout pitchers run higher pitch counts, as it's inherent to that style.

Your asinine comment that I answered was:

Well, poorly worded on my part, but you damn well know what my point was. This is about two equally effective pitchers, and one happens to be more efficient, which you have now acknowledged. No matter the style, the more efficient dominant pitcher lasts longer, thus helping his team more.

But a poll of 9 people tells you to think otherwise, so go ahead with that.

[Guido Monzino]

This is literally the 3rd or 4th time you've explained this, at some point you have to concede that this is just a fruitless effort.

On a side-note, you'll be happy to know that I sent that one post to my buddy who's made similar claims about Halladay, and his exact response was: "Well then, I stand corrected."

Yes. Fruitless. I'd like to see you take a stab at how 7 dominant innings is better than 8. I'm all ears.

[RutgersJetFan]

Yes. Fruitless. I'd like to see you take a stab at how 7 dominant innings is better than 8. I'm all ears.

There's no point, every single number or concept that you've repeated several times over has been rebutted logically. At this point, either you're too set in your opinion to react objectively, or you're just trying to rip into Met fans. The latter wouldn't be surprising, but if it's the former, there's nothing I can say that JH hasn't said several times over.

[Guido Monzino]

Now that you edited your post, I'll answer this...

My hypothetical count scenarios were to underscore how dumb it was for you to ask how Santana and Halladay throw an equal percentage of strikes.

It's cute how you'll jump all over one badly worded comment, but completely gloss over the heart of the argument. Still waiting to hear a good reason why 7 innings is better than 8.

[JohnnyHector]

Well, poorly worded on my part, but you damn well know what my point was. This is about two equally effective pitchers, and one happens to be more efficient, which you have now acknowledged. No matter the style, the more efficient dominant pitcher lasts longer, thus helping his team more.

Your point is that you'd prefer a pitcher that has a ton more balls put in play and must constantly rely on the defense behind him than a pitcher who misses bats and thus, removes the element of chance.

Gotcha. I just happen to disagree.

[Guido Monzino]

There's no point, every single number or concept that you've repeated several times over has been rebutted logically. At this point, either you're too set in your opinion to react objectively, or you're just trying to rip into Met fans. The latter wouldn't be surprising, but if it's the former, there's nothing I can say that JH hasn't said several times over.

There have been plenty of logical (and even more illogical) comments made. But not one of them refutes the main core of the discussion: 8 dominant innings is always better than 7 dominant innings.

I'll make it simple for you. Do you agree with that or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.

[JohnnyHector]

It's cute how you'll jump all over one badly worded comment, but completely gloss over the heart of the argument. Still waiting to hear a good reason why 7 innings is better than 8.

They pitched in the same era and Phil Niekro average more innings per start than Steve Carlton. Who would you rather have on your team?

[Guido Monzino]

Your point is that you'd prefer a pitcher that has a ton more balls put in play and must constantly rely on the defense behind him than a pitcher who misses bats and thus, removes the element of chance.

Gotcha. I just happen to disagree.

Fine to disagree. Not fine to think it is "assinine" or out of the realm of possibilty that Halladay is comparable to Santana.

A couple points about your "put balls in play to chance" theory.

1) Defenders behind strikeout pitchers are more prone to errors once balls are put in play. We all know that when pitchers work fast, have short inning, fielders tend to be more "on their toes" so to speak. Higher K pitchers are known to also be more victimized by errors behind them.

2) It's not as if Halladay is inducing tons of line drive outs. The guys is so dominant that hitters are way off balance and putting easily played balls into play.

So, end of the day, both guys are shutting down the opposition. Doesn't really matter how. They're both getting their job done. One just does it longer. I want that guy.

[Guido Monzino]

They pitched in the same era and Phil Niekro average more innings per start than Steve Carlton. Who would you rather have on your team?

Terrible comparison. Phil Niekro was never the dominant pitcher Carlton was. Halladay and Santana both are comparable in that regard.

[JohnnyHector]

Fine to disagree. Not fine to think it is "assinine" or out of the realm of possibilty that Halladay is comparable to Santana.

No, what was asinine was you asking how their strikeout percentages were the same.

A couple points about your "put balls in play to chance" theory.

1) Defenders behind strikeout pitchers are more prone to errors once balls are put in play. We all know that when pitchers work fast, have short inning, fielders tend to be more "on their toes" so to speak. Higher K pitchers are known to also be more victimized by errors behind them.

2) It's not as if Halladay is inducing tons of line drive outs. The guys is so dominant that hitters are way off balance and putting easily played balls into play.

The fact that Santana has a lower career BABIP than Halladay (.278 to .292) and has every year since he became a regular SP suggests otherwise. So does their career ratios of unearned runs to total runs, which for Santana is .079, while Halladay's is .103.

I'm not sure if you think preceeding statements with"we all know" and "... are known" make them factual, but in fact, it does not.

[Guido Monzino]

No, what was asinine was you asking how their strikeout percentages were the same.

Go back through the thread. I've not once said that their strikeout percentages were the same. Not once. I was the one that initially pointed out Johan gets more K's in fact.

Look, bottom line: Santana averages one more strikeout per start than Halladay. That one strikeout is very important to you. Halladay averages one more inning. You prefer to "minimize your defensive risk" by getting that precious extra one strikeout. I prefer the extra full three outs, lessening the burden on the rest of my team.

If you ask me, that's assinine.

[JohnnyHector]

Go back through the thread. I've not once said that their strikeout percentages were the same. Not once. I was the one that initially pointed out Johan gets more K's in fact.

I mistyped. I meant you questioned how their strike percentages were the same when Halladay issues less walks, which I called an asinine statement.

Look, bottom line: Santana averages one more strikeout per start than Halladay. That one strikeout is very important to you. Halladay averages one more inning. You prefer to "minimize your defensive risk" by getting that precious extra one strikeout. I prefer the extra full three outs, lessening the burden on the rest of my team.

No, being a strikeout pitcher means more than one extra out and is a big reason as to why Santana's LOB% is a fair amount higher than Halladay's - meaning he strands more runners when they get on, because fewer balls are being put in play.

Again, you have your preference and I have mine. However, I do not agree that "t's clear to everyone outside of the Mets fan circle that right now [Halladay] is the best pitcher in baseball."

[Scott Dierking]

F\

1) Defenders behind strikeout pitchers are more prone to errors once balls are put in play. We all know that when pitchers work fast, have short inning, fielders tend to be more "on their toes" so to speak. Higher K pitchers are known to also be more victimized by errors behind them.

\

Huh?

You have any proof to back that up?

Now you air pulling whimsical stats out of thin air with no basis of support

[JohnnyHector]

Huh?

You have any proof to back that up?

Now you air pulling whimsical stats out of thin air with no basis of support

C'mon, Scott. "We all know" that to be a true statement.

[Zeebers]

This thread has become pointless. Anything that needs to be proven in terms of Santana has been said about 15 times already. You can not prove someone wrong, who can never be wrong.

[Arsis]

This thread has become pointless. Anything that needs to be proven in terms of Santana has been said about 15 times already. You can not prove someone wrong, who can never be wrong.

It is big of you to admit that about yourself.

[Zeebers]

It is big of you to admit that about yourself.

Expertise from the guy who watches 2 games a year. Thanks.

[Blackout]

Johan's the best pitcher in the game the past 5 years hands down

[neckdemon]

[quote name='Blackout

[Guido Monzino]

Somebody help me. I can't seem to find any starts in the past 2 years where Halladay gave up 9 runs. Or even 8. Or even 7. Or even 6.

Roy 10-1, 103 IP, 2.53 ERA, 88 K, 12 BB, 1.04 WHIP

Johan 8-4, 82 IP, 3.29 ERA, 94 K, 24 BB, 1.22 WHIP

Might have to start thinking about switching this argument to Halladay-Greinke.

[Scott Dierking]

Somebody help me. I can't seem to find any starts in the past 2 years where Halladay gave up 9 runs. Or even 8. Or even 7. Or even 6.

Roy 10-1, 103 IP, 2.53 ERA, 88 K, 12 BB, 1.04 WHIP

Johan 8-4, 82 IP, 3.29 ERA, 94 K, 24 BB, 1.22 WHIP

Might have to start thinking about switching this argument to Halladay-Greinke.

While you were looking for that one, did you find the stat you proposed of infielders being more prone to errors playing behind strikeout pitchers?

I am still curious on that one.

[JohnnyHector]

Somebody help me. I can't seem to find any starts in the past 2 years where Halladay gave up 9 runs. Or even 8. Or even 7. Or even 6.

Roy 10-1, 103 IP, 2.53 ERA, 88 K, 12 BB, 1.04 WHIP

Johan 8-4, 82 IP, 3.29 ERA, 94 K, 24 BB, 1.22 WHIP

Might have to start thinking about switching this argument to Halladay-Greinke.

You couldn't possibly be any more predictable.

You make absurd statements with no facts to back them up and only come back to post following the worst start of Santana's career.

For the record, Halladay did give up 6 runs in a start last season... and I'm going to assume you used the "past 2 years" as your timeframe, since you looked at the 2007 game logs and saw that Halladay gave up 7+ ER three times in a span of four starts that year.