CrazyCarl40 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Just came across the AP Wires. Pettitte will announce his retirement tomorrow. VEry good career. Debatable if it is HOF worthy. Thoughts Yankees/baseball fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=6086575 ESPN now reporting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Start begging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Voice of Reason Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Congrats to Andy Pettitte for a great career. He probably won't make the HoF, but he still was one of the best pitchers in baseball over his career. Clutch guy that was a big part of the 5 rings the Yankees got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Really thought he would come back. I do wonder how much this Clemens trial over the summer impacted the decision. Sucks..... Great career for Andy. I always thought he would be a Hall of Famer b\c of the postseason wins. But he is short on regular season wins and the HGH will (rightfully) be enough to keep him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Really thought he would come back. I do wonder how much this Clemens trial over the summer impacted the decision. Sucks..... Great career for Andy. I always thought he would be a Hall of Famer b\c of the postseason wins. But he is short on regular season wins and the HGH will (rightfully) be enough to keep him out. Petitte finished at 240-138. Every other pitcher who is 100 wins over .500 who is eligible is in. That, along with his postseason numbers are his strongest arguments. I'll put it this way at the risk of the wrath of the Red Sox/Yankee hater crowd - if Petitte isn't Hall of Famer, Curt Schilling definitely isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Petitte finished at 240-138. Every other pitcher who is 100 wins over .500 who is eligible is in. That, along with his postseason numbers are his strongest arguments. I'll put it this way at the risk of the wrath of the Red Sox/Yankee hater crowd - if Petitte isn't Hall of Famer, Curt Schilling definitely isn't. He'll probably get in eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Just came across the AP Wires. Pettitte will announce his retirement tomorrow. VEry good career. Debatable if it is HOF worthy. Thoughts Yankees/baseball fans? Wow dude, did this news make your day or what.....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 he got caught cheating no chance at making it, but if they let cheaters in then he should be up there (behind Clemens ofcourse) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 he got caught cheating no chance at making it, but if they let cheaters in then he should be up there (behind Clemens ofcourse) True. Incredible that it is even being debated. He does not get until some of the other steroids and HGH users get in. Eventually that may happen. I wonder with the Wilpon situtaion if the Mets would entertain Johan to the Bronx if he comes back healthy in July. Yanks will be all over the first team with an Ace that falls out of there pennant race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I say Andy deserves a plaque on Yankee hill if there's any room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Petitte finished at 240-138. Every other pitcher who is 100 wins over .500 who is eligible is in. That, along with his postseason numbers are his strongest arguments. I'll put it this way at the risk of the wrath of the Red Sox/Yankee hater crowd - if Petitte isn't Hall of Famer, Curt Schilling definitely isn't. Why must you try and dilute the Hall with very good but not great players? Pettite was a very good pitcher, but on a good staff is not an ace type, and never won a CY award. Never had a 200k season. Won 20 just twice (although this is a dying breed). A3.88 ERA Pettitte is Jerry Koosman of his generation-A very good pitcher he served very well as a number 2 in his career.That does not make him Hall worthy. The difference between Koosman and Pettitte is that Andy was fortunate enough to pitch on some great teams so he could compile wins. Let's not water down the Hall any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Why must you try and dilute the Hall with very good but not great players? Pettite was a very good pitcher, but on a good staff is not an ace type, and never won a CY award. Never had a 200k season. Won 20 just twice (although this is a dying breed). A3.88 ERA Pettitte is Jerry Koosman of his generation-A very good pitcher he served very well as a number 2 in his career.That does not make him Hall worthy. The difference between Koosman and Pettitte is that Andy was fortunate enough to pitch on some great teams so he could compile wins. Let's not water down the Hall any more. I agree, Curt Schilling does not belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted February 4, 2011 Author Share Posted February 4, 2011 I agree, Curt Schilling does not belong. I'd put Schilling in before Pettitte, based on stats (regular and postseason), even though Andy had more wins. That had more to do with him being on the Yankees in their prime than anything else. Jayson Stark's article on Dandy Andy had a great line from an executive. "Andy was the best #3 pitcher of his generation." He was fairly durable and dependable, but never top tier. He never came close to a Cy Young, but he won rings and that's all that matters really. Needless to say though, his retirement puts the Yankees in a big hole in the rotation. CC better be ready to pitch 300 innings. If he got hurt the Yankees would be selling the farm for someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I'd put Schilling in before Pettitte, based on stats (regular and postseason), even though Andy had more wins. That had more to do with him being on the Yankees in their prime than anything else. Jayson Stark's article on Dandy Andy had a great line from an executive. "Andy was the best #3 pitcher of his generation." He was fairly durable and dependable, but never top tier. He never came close to a Cy Young, but he won rings and that's all that matters really. Needless to say though, his retirement puts the Yankees in a big hole in the rotation. CC better be ready to pitch 300 innings. If he got hurt the Yankees would be selling the farm for someone. Andy has one argument that is much, much stronger than any argument that can possibly made for Schilling - EVERY PITCHER WHO IS 100 GAMES OVER .500 AND IS ELIGIBLE IS IN THE HALL OF FAME. Petitte won more and lost less than Schilling. If you are the 3rd best pitcher of your generation you are probably a Hall of Famer. There are about 25 eligible pitchers who have cases that are as strong or stronger than Schilling who aren't in and aren't close to gettting in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Why must you try and dilute the Hall with very good but not great players? Pettite was a very good pitcher, but on a good staff is not an ace type, and never won a CY award. Never had a 200k season. Won 20 just twice (although this is a dying breed). A3.88 ERA Pettitte is Jerry Koosman of his generation-A very good pitcher he served very well as a number 2 in his career.That does not make him Hall worthy. The difference between Koosman and Pettitte is that Andy was fortunate enough to pitch on some great teams so he could compile wins. Let's not water down the Hall any more. The answer is because it is already full of very good, but not great players. As for Koosman, why did you have to bring him up? He's regular Wesley Snipes when it comes to paying taxes. I'd put Schilling in before Pettitte, based on stats (regular and postseason), even though Andy had more wins. That had more to do with him being on the Yankees in their prime than anything else. Jayson Stark's article on Dandy Andy had a great line from an executive. "Andy was the best #3 pitcher of his generation." He was fairly durable and dependable, but never top tier. He never came close to a Cy Young, but he won rings and that's all that matters really. Needless to say though, his retirement puts the Yankees in a big hole in the rotation. CC better be ready to pitch 300 innings. If he got hurt the Yankees would be selling the farm for someone. Schilling pitched all those years in the National League and Pettitte in AL. If you switched them many of their stats might well flip flop. The #3 comment is a load of crap. A GM would have been happy to pencil in a rotation with three Andy Pettittes at the top and fill in #4 and #5 starters. Saying he wasn't top tier is one thing, but a #3 is a joke. He certainly should get in based on the Curtis Martin logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 It's amazing how many people come out of the woodwork to give their opinion on Yankees that are borderline. Pettitte will probably eventually get in...he was part of the core four that won 5 championships and was a pretty damn good pitcher while doing so. The Hall of Fame has a litany of questionable guys. That being said, Schilling will get in too. As a fan, it doesn't really make much of a difference to me. I always enjoyed watching Pettitte pitch because he pretty much always gave the Yankees a chance to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted February 4, 2011 Author Share Posted February 4, 2011 Andy has one argument that is much, much stronger than any argument that can possibly made for Schilling - EVERY PITCHER WHO IS 100 GAMES OVER .500 AND IS ELIGIBLE IS IN THE HALL OF FAME. Petitte won more and lost less than Schilling. If you are the 3rd best pitcher of your generation you are probably a Hall of Famer. There are about 25 eligible pitchers who have cases that are as strong or stronger than Schilling who aren't in and aren't close to gettting in. Not the 3rd best best pitcher, the best #3 pitcher in a rotation for his generation. Schilling was a World Series MVP. Pettitte doesn't have that. I agree one shouldn't get in without the other, but I'd take Curt Schilling in a game 7 must win over Andy Pettitte any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 It's amazing how many people come out of the woodwork to give their opinion on Yankees that are borderline. Pettitte will probably eventually get in...he was part of the core four that won 5 championships and was a pretty damn good pitcher while doing so. The Hall of Fame has a litany of questionable guys. That being said, Schilling will get in too. As a fan, it doesn't really make much of a difference to me. I always enjoyed watching Pettitte pitch because he pretty much always gave the Yankees a chance to win. I don't know if that first part is a dig at Carl and Dierking or at me! Either way, I agree with you. I think he has a fair chance to get in and I think his career merits the discussion. OTOH, I don't care too much. He has a place in Yankee history and that means more to me. Just as Schilling will probably get in too, but either way, his bloody sock and cold sore will be part of Red Sox history forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I don't know if that first part is a dig at Carl and Dierking or at me! Either way, I agree with you. I think he has a fair chance to get in and I think his career merits the discussion. OTOH, I don't care too much. He has a place in Yankee history and that means more to me. Just as Schilling will probably get in too, but either way, his bloody sock and cold sore will be part of Red Sox history forever. Exactly, As a fan, does it really matter? Do you root for individual accomplishments or the team to win? Pettitte did a tremendous job helping the Yankees win. Eventually Pettitte will get in. That's just my opinion. When Posada retires this convo will start right back up again with the usual suspects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted February 4, 2011 Author Share Posted February 4, 2011 Exactly, As a fan, does it really matter? Do you root for individual accomplishments or the team to win? Pettitte did a tremendous job helping the Yankees win. Eventually Pettitte will get in. That's just my opinion. When Posada retires this convo will start right back up again with the usual suspects. Well at least we'll know we can agree on Mo and Jeter getting in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Well at least we'll know we can agree on Mo and Jeter getting in. Hell, I'm sure people will lobby for Ortiz too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmikeisback Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Hell, I'm sure people will lobby for Ortiz too. Ortiz isn't a hall of famer even if he didn't cheat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Ortiz isn't a hall of famer even if he didn't cheat. He's like Terrell Davis. At his peak over 3 years, he was insanely dominant. And everyone cheated so who cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 It barely even crossed my mind until someone pointed it out here, Pettite does have 5 rings (and a few other WS trips)....it's funny how rings mean SOO much in the NBA (i.e. Kobe Bryant has 5 and he's a legend) but in MLB having 5 rings is an oversight to regular season stats (which sportswriters have masturbated over for 100 years) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 It barely even crossed my mind until someone pointed it out here, Pettite does have 5 rings (and a few other WS trips)....it's funny how rings mean SOO much in the NBA (i.e. Kobe Bryant has 5 and he's a legend) but in MLB having 5 rings is an oversight to regular season stats (which sportswriters have masturbated over for 100 years) Baseball is pretty much an individual sport....but I definitely think the writers do value rings. They weigh in other sh*t....not that I agree with that, but they definitely do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 If some of these Yankees don't get in the Kirby Puckett vote is going to look worse over time. He got in for his two rings despite lacking numbers. 5 rings? Yeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 If some of these Yankees don't get in the Kirby Puckett vote is going to look worse over time. He got in for his two rings despite lacking numbers. 5 rings? Yeah... You would have to put Tommy John, Jack Morris and Jim Kaat among others in first. Pettitte is David wells, who just happened to pitch on better teams longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Petitte finished at 240-138. Every other pitcher who is 100 wins over .500 who is eligible is in. That, along with his postseason numbers are his strongest arguments. I'll put it this way at the risk of the wrath of the Red Sox/Yankee hater crowd - if Petitte isn't Hall of Famer, Curt Schilling definitely isn't. Not only are you wrong, but you are impressively wrong. Blackout's point is a good barometer to getting in as Andy did own his mistake. Anyways, Schilling is far more deserving than Andy. First, Andy clearly benefited from playing for the best team in MLB from 1995-2010. He won 240 games because he was a Yankee. He was a 100 games over .500 because he was a Yankee. Go look at his win totals and ERA during his first Yankee stint. He had decent numbers, but if he was on a middle of the road team in talent and payroll, he likely has 80-100 wins instead of 149. Curt did not play for too many good teams during the first half of his career, but he had some eye popping numbers. Put him on the Yankees instead of the Orioles and Phillies, he is a 300 game winner. Second, like during the regular season, Andy clearly benefited from being a Yankee during the playoffs. Number 1 in wins at 19. Nice total and you can say at the very least he was consistent in the playoffs. Curt was dominant in the playoffs. 19-10 3.88 ERA vs. 11-2 2.23 ERA. It is game 7, who do you want pitching? No one can make an argument for Andy. Last, what are Andy's great moments? I am sure a Yankee fan can think of a few maybe even some in the playoffs. However, Curt clearly has more and they transcended across fan base barriers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Pettitte is a Yankee HOFer, not a cooperstown guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Not only are you wrong, but you are impressively wrong. Blackout's point is a good barometer to getting in as Andy did own his mistake. Anyways, Schilling is far more deserving than Andy. First, Andy clearly benefited from playing for the best team in MLB from 1995-2010. He won 240 games because he was a Yankee. He was a 100 games over .500 because he was a Yankee. Go look at his win totals and ERA during his first Yankee stint. He had decent numbers, but if he was on a middle of the road team in talent and payroll, he likely has 80-100 wins instead of 149. Curt did not play for too many good teams during the first half of his career, but he had some eye popping numbers. Put him on the Yankees instead of the Orioles and Phillies, he is a 300 game winner. Second, like during the regular season, Andy clearly benefited from being a Yankee during the playoffs. Number 1 in wins at 19. Nice total and you can say at the very least he was consistent in the playoffs. Curt was dominant in the playoffs. 19-10 3.88 ERA vs. 11-2 2.23 ERA. It is game 7, who do you want pitching? No one can make an argument for Andy. Last, what are Andy's great moments? I am sure a Yankee fan can think of a few maybe even some in the playoffs. However, Curt clearly has more and they transcended across fan base barriers. OK Homer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 OK Homer. I see you did not dispute anything I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 I see you did not dispute anything I said. It was too ridiculous to dispute. Pettitte finished his career 102 wins over .500. Every pitcher who is 100 or more wins over .500 who is eligible is in. Pettitte averaged 15 wins a year, Schilling barely averaged 10. He is also the winningest postseason pitcher in major league history. Oh, and part of the reason the teams Pettitte played on were so good was Andy freakin' Pettitte. The dude was rock in the rotation for a dynasty, year in, year out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 It was too ridiculous to dispute. Pettitte finished his career 102 wins over .500. Every pitcher who is 100 or more wins over .500 who is eligible is in. Pettitte averaged 15 wins a year, Schilling barely averaged 10. He is also the winningest postseason pitcher in major league history. Oh, and part of the reason the teams Pettitte played on were so good was Andy freakin' Pettitte. The dude was rock in the rotation for a dynasty, year in, year out. All your points boil down to one thing, because he was a Yankee. "He was 102 games over .500" because he was a Yankee. He never pitched on a team below .500. The worst team he played for was an 82-80 Astros team. Schilling on the other did not have that benefit. 2 of his 3 teams in Baltimore were sub-.500 including a 107 loss team. A 97 loss Astros team. 8 of the 9 teams in Philly were sub-.500. It was not until he went to Arizona did he ride the success of a good team. He was 23 games over .500 in Philly when the team collectively 100 game sunder .500. Petite average 15 win versus Schilling's 10. That is your argument. Forgetting the fact above, you do realize Schilling spent part of his career as a reliever? A couple of late season call-ups in Baltimore. A couple of injury shortened years. Do not let common sense get in the way of your manipulation of numbers. He is also the winningest postseason pitcher in major league history because he played for the Yankees. He has the most wins. He is not the winningest. Again, that is more a by-product of his being on the Yankees. Like with his bloated regular season win total, did he have a phenomenal ERA, K total or any other meaningful stat? No. He is a good picture. He played on a team that had a historical run and was generally one of the best teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 All your points boil down to one thing, because he was a Yankee. "He was 102 games over .500" because he was a Yankee. He never pitched on a team below .500. The worst team he played for was an 82-80 Astros team. Schilling on the other did not have that benefit. 2 of his 3 teams in Baltimore were sub-.500 including a 107 loss team. A 97 loss Astros team. 8 of the 9 teams in Philly were sub-.500. It was not until he went to Arizona did he ride the success of a good team. He was 23 games over .500 in Philly when the team collectively 100 game sunder .500. Petite average 15 win versus Schilling's 10. That is your argument. Forgetting the fact above, you do realize Schilling spent part of his career as a reliever? A couple of late season call-ups in Baltimore. A couple of injury shortened years. Do not let common sense get in the way of your manipulation of numbers. He is also the winningest postseason pitcher in major league history because he played for the Yankees. He has the most wins. He is not the winningest. Again, that is more a by-product of his being on the Yankees. Like with his bloated regular season win total, did he have a phenomenal ERA, K total or any other meaningful stat? No. He is a good picture. He played on a team that had a historical run and was generally one of the best teams. Your argument is moronic and based on specious logic. You ever consider that if Pettitte isn't on the Yankees during that period that maybe they don't win quite so many games and go to the postseason quite so many times. Pettitte was a big reason those Yankees teams were that good you dolt. To claim he wasn't is to admit you don't have a clue what you are talking about and didn't watch the Yankees very much the last 16 years. Winningest means he has the most wins. Learn English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.