Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
People always talk about head size (Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens). Well, take a look at pictures of Pedro...his head is just as big as compared to the rest of his body.
Don't misunderstand me, I firmly believe all of them...Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Martinez, Sosa, Palmeiro, et al... belong in the Hall of Fame. I really don't care if they did or did not use PED's.
<< <i>There are knocks on Pedro for sure - only 2 20-win seasons >>
Let's remember that 20 win seasons are not as frequent as they were before Pedro's career began.
From 1994 - 2009 (while Pedro has been pitching) there were 47 20+ win years for individual pitchers and he has 2 of them. From 1974 - 1989 (20 years b4 he started pitching) there were 84 20+ win years for individual pitchers. That is a 45% drop ... which IMO is HUGE.
STAY HEALTHY!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
Really? Consider that Pedro:
- was a lanky pitcher who threw in the high 90s - was injured frequently - saw his performance drop significantly after 2003 (when testing began) - was a member of the Red Sox, notorious for their usage of PEDs (yes, guilt by association)
The dirty secret of the PED era is that pitchers stood to benefit from them as much, if not more, than hitters. The main effect of steroids is that they promote healing of muscles after usage. This allows the user to workout more often and more intensely but it also allows pitchers to recover from pitching faster. The net effect of THAT is that they can throw harder since they will recover more quickly. Where do you think all the guys throwing 98+ suddenly came from in the 1990s?
Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
Really? Consider that Pedro:
- was a lanky pitcher who threw in the high 90s - was injured frequently - saw his performance drop significantly after 2003 (when testing began) - was a member of the Red Sox, notorious for their usage of PEDs (yes, guilt by association)
Tabe >>
All valid points, but I would argue that Pedro relied on movement on his pitches just as much as speed. Frequent injuries come from a throwing motion that put alot of strain on his arm, which also caused him to break down earlier. The Red Sox argument will always haunt anyone on that team and has proven true.
I do agree that pitchers benefitted just as much, if not more than hitters. Unfortunately we will probably never know the extent of the usage, but I guess Pedro would surprise me.
Does anyone remember the gem he pitched in Yankee stadium - 1 hitter. Every time he left the mound he had a smirk on his face and glanced around the stands as he walked to the dugout. Inning after dominating inning. Greatest single game I have ever seen pitched. Dave
<< <i>Seems someone asks a question and wants to argue the merits of a sure-fire first ballot HOFer. What was the purpose of the question, then? Why not just state that YOU don't think he's a HOFer? And if that's what you think, present your argument rather than suggest that you have a few issues with his career and seasonal numbers and arguing with others because EVERYONE recognizes that he's a no-brainer HOFer.
If you want discredit Martinez because he didn't complete games, pitch mega innings or top 20+ wins for a decade straight, then go ahead. You just demonstrate a complete ignorance to the dominance of the player as a whole. Personally, I couldn't stand Pedro and his act, but there is no way that ANYONE should be able to suggest that he was not one of the most dominant pitchers of his era and during his peak in the late 1990's (1997-2000), he was one of the best pitchers to ever play the game. >>
Sir.
Fair enough. I did ask the question and I suppose in that context I should have simply waited for the pristine wisdom of folks like you to come rolling in.
Not sure I was attempting to discredit Pedro as you suggest, but rather to offer up a couple of stats that might bring into question his election to Cooperstown. I see you are easily offended.
BTW, you were wrong....three times! Onebamafan was not convinced, so your assertion that the forum was unanimous of Pedro's election was incorrect. Second, I clearly stated in my initial post that "I supposed" he should be a HOFer. Thus, your claim that I oppose his induction is also incorrect. I was only offering up a couple of statistics--that I personally see as telling--to try and encourage some friendly discussion. I desperately hope that you are not opposed to my perogative there, as well. Also, I never questioned whether or not he was one of the most dominant pitchers of his era, only whether or not he belonged in the HOF (there is a difference). And that was your third error.
Eyebone >>
Well, Onebamafan has regularly demonstrated that, while entitled to his opinion, he knows squat about most things he spews forth.
Speaking of easily offended, your sarcasm needs work...
The vagueness of your post and subsequent follow up left many things to conjecture. The fact that you questioned some of Pedro's stats has little to do with the points your were subliminally suggesting. If I was wrong in reading your enlightening banter, then color me red with embarrassment. But then again, I couldn't give two spits what your "perogative (sic)" is.
Since you arbitrarily decided that 250+ innings pitched and 20+ win seasons are measuring sticks that Pedro must be held to because a few other contemporaries accomplished them suggests that you have a negative lilt towards the actual accomplishments of Martinez throughout his career. It also notes that you've paid little attention to the fact that the current five man rotations and 7th, 8th and 9th inning specialists have virtually eliminated repeated 20 win and 250+ inning seasons. In fact, this past season, not one pitcher in major league baseball won 20 games and no one pitched more than 240 innings. But then again, we must still hold Pedro to such a standard. Last season, 2008, 4 pitchers won 20 or more games and only one pitched more than 250 innings... In 2007 only one pitcher won 20 games and again, no one reached 250 innings. In 2006, again there were no 20 game winners and no one pitched 250 or more innings. It appears that that's a pretty demanding standard you wish to apply to Martinez.
So, in the past 4 Major League seasons, there have been 5 20 game winners (no repeaters) and 1 pitcher that reached 250 innings.
Engaging in any serious diatribe and discussion would probably prove as useful as grabbing a ball-peen hammer and smashing it repeatedly against my forehead. In fact, given the time I've wasted in responding, the hammer sounds like a pretty reasonable alternative.
First you insult me without provocation and now you insult onebamafan for no other reason--that I can see--than we don't completely agree with you.
There is no reasonable discussion with your type. I simply avoid guys like you. Pass me that hammer.
Eyebone >>
A tad bit sensitive? The only person I insulted was onebamafan...
I couldn't care less whether you agree with me or not. I was pointing out some simple facts. If this creates a problem, please feel free to ignore me and you can have the hammer as long as you promise to use it until it causes significant structural damage.
As for insults . . . you're a dolt if you even question whether Pedro is a Hall of Famer. That's not opinion, that's a FACT! I'll lay you $100 to your apology that Pedro will be a first ballot Hall of Fame selection.
I think it's a question of longetivity in the eyes of the voters. He's got a HOF record in a certain period of time, but is it long enough? 220 or so wins isn't enough in many eyes no matter how dominant he was for a 7 or 8 year period of time. Plus many look down on a player that drags out his career - although watching him last night says he's still got it.
The obsession with career wins as some sort of primary gauge of a pitcher's prowess is truly mistifying...
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Because there are so many factors outside a pitcher's control that factor into a decision. Obviously, if an outstanding pitcher pitcher pitches for mostly bad teams, he's not going to get as many victories as a mediocre pitcher pitching for a good team. If you were the GM of a MLB team, would you rather have a pitcher with fewer wins but a significantly better ERA, WHIP and K to BB ratio? Or the 20-game winner with an ERA of 4.00? All of Pedro's most meaningful stats are truly exceptional: a career ERA under 3.00 (truly remarkable in this era of smaller parks and juiced-up sluggers), a career WHIP of just above 1, and an ERA+ of 154. Winner of the Cy Young Award in both leagues, he also led the league in ERA FIVE times (and two of thoise times with an ERA under 2!), and WHIP an unbelievable SIX times. And though he may not have 300 wins, his winning pct. of .687 is flat out awesome. When you look behind misleading stats like career voctories, you begin to realize just how dominant Pedro was during an era when a "quality start" was determined by a 4.50 ERA through 6 IP before the bullpen takes over (for better or worse).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
True, I'm thinking simply of toughness, the ability to hang in there and win the game vs. pitching 6 or 7 innings and thats it, turn it over to the bullpen.
True, I'm thinking simply of toughness, the ability to hang in there and win the game vs. pitching 6 or 7 innings and thats it, turn it over to the bullpen.
I understand where you're coming from...but even if you factor that issue into account, Pedro has started 409 games in his career and has pitched 2827 total innings, an average of 7 IP per start (and that's including the last coiuple of years when his outings have been usually shorter), so there's no question he left the vast majority of his games pitched deep into the game after giving up only a couple of runs at most (and usually fewer than that).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I think it's a question of longetivity in the eyes of the voters >>
Martinez was a very good pitcher in 1993. He was very good every year through 2005, with at least a couple years that were among the very best in history. That is as many years at a top level as Marichal, Gibson or Drysdale. . .
<< <i> True, I'm thinking simply of toughness, the ability to hang in there and win the game vs. pitching 6 or 7 innings and thats it, turn it over to the bullpen.
I understand where you're coming from...but even if you factor that issue into account, Pedro has started 409 games in his career and has pitched 2827 total innings, an average of 7 IP per start (and that's including the last coiuple of years when his outings have been usually shorter), so there's no question he left the vast majority of his games pitched deep into the game after giving up only a couple of runs at most (and usually fewer than that). >>
It's actually a little better than that. Those 2827 innings include the 100 or so he got as a reliever.
Comments
<< <i>Heck yea he's a HOFer!
Even though I still think he's used PEDs.
Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
People always talk about head size (Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens). Well, take a look at pictures of Pedro...his head is just as big as compared to the rest of his body.
Don't misunderstand me, I firmly believe all of them...Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Martinez, Sosa, Palmeiro, et al... belong in the Hall of Fame. I really don't care if they did or did not use PED's.
Steve
<< <i>There are knocks on Pedro for sure - only 2 20-win seasons >>
Let's remember that 20 win seasons are not as frequent as they were before Pedro's career began.
From 1994 - 2009 (while Pedro has been pitching) there were 47 20+ win years for individual pitchers and he has 2 of them.
From 1974 - 1989 (20 years b4 he started pitching) there were 84 20+ win years for individual pitchers.
That is a 45% drop ... which IMO is HUGE.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>
<< <i>Heck yea he's a HOFer!
Even though I still think he's used PEDs. >>
Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
Really? Consider that Pedro:
- was a lanky pitcher who threw in the high 90s
- was injured frequently
- saw his performance drop significantly after 2003 (when testing began)
- was a member of the Red Sox, notorious for their usage of PEDs (yes, guilt by association)
The dirty secret of the PED era is that pitchers stood to benefit from them as much, if not more, than hitters. The main effect of steroids is that they promote healing of muscles after usage. This allows the user to workout more often and more intensely but it also allows pitchers to recover from pitching faster. The net effect of THAT is that they can throw harder since they will recover more quickly. Where do you think all the guys throwing 98+ suddenly came from in the 1990s?
So, yeah, I firmly believe Pedro used PEDs.
Tabe
Is this a joke? You cannot honestly believe that Pedro was on anything. What would make you believe this other than guilty by association? >>
Really? Consider that Pedro:
- was a lanky pitcher who threw in the high 90s
- was injured frequently
- saw his performance drop significantly after 2003 (when testing began)
- was a member of the Red Sox, notorious for their usage of PEDs (yes, guilt by association)
Tabe >>
All valid points, but I would argue that Pedro relied on movement on his pitches just as much as speed. Frequent injuries come from a throwing motion that put alot of strain on his arm, which also caused him to break down earlier. The Red Sox argument will always haunt anyone on that team and has proven true.
I do agree that pitchers benefitted just as much, if not more than hitters. Unfortunately we will probably never know the extent of the usage, but I guess Pedro would surprise me.
T222's PSA 1 or better
Does anyone remember the gem he pitched in Yankee stadium - 1 hitter. Every time he left the mound he had a smirk on his face and glanced around the stands as he walked to the dugout. Inning after dominating inning. Greatest single game I have ever seen pitched. Dave
<< <i>
<< <i>Seems someone asks a question and wants to argue the merits of a sure-fire first ballot HOFer. What was the purpose of the question, then? Why not just state that YOU don't think he's a HOFer? And if that's what you think, present your argument rather than suggest that you have a few issues with his career and seasonal numbers and arguing with others because EVERYONE recognizes that he's a no-brainer HOFer.
If you want discredit Martinez because he didn't complete games, pitch mega innings or top 20+ wins for a decade straight, then go ahead. You just demonstrate a complete ignorance to the dominance of the player as a whole. Personally, I couldn't stand Pedro and his act, but there is no way that ANYONE should be able to suggest that he was not one of the most dominant pitchers of his era and during his peak in the late 1990's (1997-2000), he was one of the best pitchers to ever play the game. >>
Sir.
Fair enough. I did ask the question and I suppose in that context I should have simply waited for the pristine wisdom of folks like you to come rolling in.
Not sure I was attempting to discredit Pedro as you suggest, but rather to offer up a couple of stats that might bring into question his election to Cooperstown. I see you are easily offended.
BTW, you were wrong....three times! Onebamafan was not convinced, so your assertion that the forum was unanimous of Pedro's election was incorrect. Second, I clearly stated in my initial post that "I supposed" he should be a HOFer. Thus, your claim that I oppose his induction is also incorrect. I was only offering up a couple of statistics--that I personally see as telling--to try and encourage some friendly discussion. I desperately hope that you are not opposed to my perogative there, as well. Also, I never questioned whether or not he was one of the most dominant pitchers of his era, only whether or not he belonged in the HOF (there is a difference). And that was your third error.
Eyebone >>
Well, Onebamafan has regularly demonstrated that, while entitled to his opinion, he knows squat about most things he spews forth.
Speaking of easily offended, your sarcasm needs work...
The vagueness of your post and subsequent follow up left many things to conjecture. The fact that you questioned some of Pedro's stats has little to do with the points your were subliminally suggesting. If I was wrong in reading your enlightening banter, then color me red with embarrassment. But then again, I couldn't give two spits what your "perogative (sic)" is.
Since you arbitrarily decided that 250+ innings pitched and 20+ win seasons are measuring sticks that Pedro must be held to because a few other contemporaries accomplished them suggests that you have a negative lilt towards the actual accomplishments of Martinez throughout his career. It also notes that you've paid little attention to the fact that the current five man rotations and 7th, 8th and 9th inning specialists have virtually eliminated repeated 20 win and 250+ inning seasons. In fact, this past season, not one pitcher in major league baseball won 20 games and no one pitched more than 240 innings. But then again, we must still hold Pedro to such a standard. Last season, 2008, 4 pitchers won 20 or more games and only one pitched more than 250 innings... In 2007 only one pitcher won 20 games and again, no one reached 250 innings. In 2006, again there were no 20 game winners and no one pitched 250 or more innings. It appears that that's a pretty demanding standard you wish to apply to Martinez.
So, in the past 4 Major League seasons, there have been 5 20 game winners (no repeaters) and 1 pitcher that reached 250 innings.
Engaging in any serious diatribe and discussion would probably prove as useful as grabbing a ball-peen hammer and smashing it repeatedly against my forehead. In fact, given the time I've wasted in responding, the hammer sounds like a pretty reasonable alternative.
First you insult me without provocation and now you insult onebamafan for no other reason--that I can see--than we don't completely agree with you.
There is no reasonable discussion with your type. I simply avoid guys like you. Pass me that hammer.
Eyebone
<< <i>Sir.
First you insult me without provocation and now you insult onebamafan for no other reason--that I can see--than we don't completely agree with you.
There is no reasonable discussion with your type. I simply avoid guys like you. Pass me that hammer.
Eyebone >>
A tad bit sensitive? The only person I insulted was onebamafan...
I couldn't care less whether you agree with me or not. I was pointing out some simple facts. If this creates a problem, please feel free to ignore me and you can have the hammer as long as you promise to use it until it causes significant structural damage.
As for insults . . . you're a dolt if you even question whether Pedro is a Hall of Famer. That's not opinion, that's a FACT! I'll lay you $100 to your apology that Pedro will be a first ballot Hall of Fame selection.
"Molon Labe"
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
"Molon Labe"
Because there are so many factors outside a pitcher's control that factor into a decision. Obviously, if an outstanding pitcher pitcher pitches for mostly bad teams, he's not going to get as many victories as a mediocre pitcher pitching for a good team. If you were the GM of a MLB team, would you rather have a pitcher with fewer wins but a significantly better ERA, WHIP and K to BB ratio? Or the 20-game winner with an ERA of 4.00? All of Pedro's most meaningful stats are truly exceptional: a career ERA under 3.00 (truly remarkable in this era of smaller parks and juiced-up sluggers), a career WHIP of just above 1, and an ERA+ of 154. Winner of the Cy Young Award in both leagues, he also led the league in ERA FIVE times (and two of thoise times with an ERA under 2!), and WHIP an unbelievable SIX times. And though he may not have 300 wins, his winning pct. of .687 is flat out awesome. When you look behind misleading stats like career voctories, you begin to realize just how dominant Pedro was during an era when a "quality start" was determined by a 4.50 ERA through 6 IP before the bullpen takes over (for better or worse).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
"Molon Labe"
I understand where you're coming from...but even if you factor that issue into account, Pedro has started 409 games in his career and has pitched 2827 total innings, an average of 7 IP per start (and that's including the last coiuple of years when his outings have been usually shorter), so there's no question he left the vast majority of his games pitched deep into the game after giving up only a couple of runs at most (and usually fewer than that).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I think it's a question of longetivity in the eyes of the voters >>
Martinez was a very good pitcher in 1993. He was very good every year through 2005, with at least a couple years that were among the very best in history. That is as many years at a top level as Marichal, Gibson or Drysdale. . .
<< <i> True, I'm thinking simply of toughness, the ability to hang in there and win the game vs. pitching 6 or 7 innings and thats it, turn it over to the bullpen.
I understand where you're coming from...but even if you factor that issue into account, Pedro has started 409 games in his career and has pitched 2827 total innings, an average of 7 IP per start (and that's including the last coiuple of years when his outings have been usually shorter), so there's no question he left the vast majority of his games pitched deep into the game after giving up only a couple of runs at most (and usually fewer than that). >>
It's actually a little better than that. Those 2827 innings include the 100 or so he got as a reliever.
Tabe
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658