The facts defy your contention.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

In 2004? Without even the smallest doubt. Each of the 30 teams would have preferred Sheets take Colon's starts that year.

Over the course of their careers? No.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

It takes a team to win. And each player contributes to their team's success and failure.

The Angels offense was able to compensate for Colon's inability to prevent runs from scoring.

Most pitchers do not get that luxury over the course of a long season.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

30 teams would rather have 12 wins than 18? *plays Jim Hendry clown drop

Sheets would have won 22 games on the Angels that season. Minimum.

According to his All-Star appearance and his Cy Young votes...it is widely accepted that Sheets' 2004 season was superior to Colon's 2004 season.

Why can you not accept it? Incessant desire to play the contrarian?

Baseball hipster?

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

So Bartolo's team had a better chance to win when he pitched than when Sheets pitched, I agree with that.

Yeah a career below .500 pitcher who never won more than 13 games in a season would magically win 22 someplace else, and I'm the baseball hipster.

Sheets may not have racked up wins on the Angels, because he didnt go deep into games. Went 6 innings or less 10 times that year.

But its ridiculous to put the losses all on Sheets.

Ben Sheets was 8th that season, in all of baseball, for IP/GS.

Colon was 53rd.

Fun fact. The Angels won 62% of the games Colon started. Good for 22nd in the league.

Teams had better win loss records when 21 other pitchers took the mound.

Colon had 5.9 run support per start.

Sheets had 3.4 run support per start.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

That's why I specifically stated the ten times thing. Averages can be manipulated. If you go 6 innings, you're leaving a lot of things to chance. Sheets did that 11 times (I missed one) in 04


Also, there is such a thing as clutch, Pitching with a lead, shutdown innings etc.


I bet a lot of people are thinking Colon won a bunch of games where he pitched poorly.

He got one win where he let up 4 runs. The other 17 wins were 3 runs or less.

Some of Colon's numbers got blown up in big losses. That's another little wrinkle in ERA

I've never stated any such thing, but I will unequivocally state that W/L record is a lot better evaluator than whatever crazy numbers you're using to come to the very bad conclusions that Ben Sheets was better than Bartolo Colon and that Ted Lyons sucked.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

He also had 5 CG (and one other game where he went 9 innings of scoreless ball, but it went to extras). Colon had none.

Averages are averages for a reason.

As many times as Sheets went 6 IP, he made up for it by going eight or nine.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

How did Felix Hernandez manage to win the Cy Young award in 2010 even though he put up similar numbers that Sheets put up in 2004? The players and voters knew that despite winning 8 fewer games than 2 other AL pitchers he had a better season.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Nas would want Sheets over Colon. But Nas doesn't want Melo(puts up tremendous numbers on a losing team this year) on the Bulls. Seems like some logical inconsistency to me.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

You've been arguing for years that W/L are the only way you evaluate how good a pitcher is. We are reading your posts. I never said Lyons sucked. He's a HoFer that pitched over 500 games and IIRC has 20 more wins than losses. That's the type of guy you hate.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Do you really think the game is played in component parts that way as if the events that occur during the game are unrelated? I don't believe for one second had Bartolo Colon pitched for the 2004 Brewers that he would have had a sub-.500 record. I have no idea what his other numbers would have been, but I'm damn sure about that.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

I would have taken the 2004 Ben Sheets over Colon or any other pitcher who won more games with a 5+ ERA.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Then quote the post where I said such a thing.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

That's probably why you're not a GM.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

JORR thinks Edwin Jackson is a pretty good pitcher. He was .500 W-L before he came to the Cubs.

Jackson is 1-1 this season, and Samardzija is 0-2.

Obviously way more teams are interested in trading for Jackson than for Samardzija. Because Jackson has definitely pitched better. Cuz WINZ

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Lance Lynn and Mark Buehrle are the best pitchers in baseball right now...

Who do you think is better than Buehrle right now?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

No one, but clearly Lance Lynn is his equal.

Possibly. I wouldn't really judge anyone over 4 starts though.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

But three starts is gravy.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

You want the guy who is doing worse vs. the guys he is facing? That seems pretty damn dumb.

A lot of you don't seem to respect the concept of actual baseball games. So I'll pose this question, do you think a good change would be to award the division titles to the teams with the best run differential?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

You need to make a succinct and clear statement on your position. You're all over the place, bringing in arguments people aren't discussing.

Make a statement about wins and losses. Make it clear. Make it precise.

I've always thought W-L record in games started is an underquoted statistic.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

I'm absolutely clear and precise and I assume I'm talking to reasonably intelligent people here. I really hope I don't have to dumb it down as if I'm conversing with third graders.

I'll try to make it clear for you. If you don't think performance within the strict context of a game, i.e. Ben Sheets actually competing against an opposing team on a given day, is important and that performance is better viewed detached from the individual game in which it actually occurred, do you believe that it would serve us best not to consider end results of specific games and instead use overall numbers to decide the championship. There would definitely be many ancillary benefits, for example, no more need for extra inning games. In fact, you could reasonably set a three hour time limit on a game. And Ben Sheets would not be punished for his superior pitching efforts as his great ability to prevent runs would more fairly be rewarded while Colon's stratospheric ERA would be punished.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

Literally the opposite of clear and concise. You're still all over the place. And not making statements, you're asking questions.