- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Incredible Stat- Greg Maddux
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:20 am to The Sad Banana
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:20 am to The Sad Banana
If a player had their best years during that time, then testing started and they fell off and stayed banged up. Good chance they were enhanced. Andruw Jones.
0
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:21 am to crimsonian
I am sure alot of pitchers took PEDs as well. Doesn't change the fact that Pedro pitched in a much worse pitching environment than Koufax. Run production was substantially higher in Pedro's era.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:23 am to The Seaward
He was cheating. Make his fastball 90 instead of 95 and see what his stats would be.
Oh i'm sorry, we did see his stats when his fastball dropped.
Oh i'm sorry, we did see his stats when his fastball dropped.
This post was edited on 8/3/12 at 8:24 am
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:26 am to crimsonian
I didn't realize you have proof that he cheated.
This post was edited on 8/3/12 at 8:27 am
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:26 am to crimsonian
If you are going to use the argument that he juiced in the juicing era, wouldn't you imagine that leveled the playing field...in that era?
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:27 am to crimsonian
This thread is full of fail. Yes, Pedro was great for a little while. Maddux was great for a career. Doing it for a long period is what makes it special.
Maddux > Pedro
Maddux > Pedro
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:28 am to The Seaward
No proof Clemens did either.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:29 am to RollDatRoll
Maddux does have about 30 more WAR on fangraphs than Pedro. I think most people are arguing best at their absolute peak though.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:29 am to The Sad Banana
Yes, but Maddux was not juicing and was pitching against juicers. See the difference.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:31 am to The Seaward
That is not how it started. It was said that Pedro was better, not at his peak.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:36 am to crimsonian
quote:
That is not how it started. It was said that Pedro was better, not at his peak.
I said he was the best I had ever seen, with Maddux being number two. I didn't say he had the better career. And honestly I was giving him a pretty big complement, as there are a lot of people who think Clemens and Randy Johnson were better than Mad Dog. I don't agree. Pedro at his best was the best I've seen, followed by Maddux.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:39 am to PortCityTiger24
You said he was the best pitcher in your lifetime.
This post was edited on 8/3/12 at 8:41 am
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:45 am to crimsonian
Yes I did.
Barry Sanders is the best RB of my lifetime, but Emmett Smith had a better career.
Is it that hard to understand?
Barry Sanders is the best RB of my lifetime, but Emmett Smith had a better career.
Is it that hard to understand?
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:50 am to PortCityTiger24
Yes, I understand. PED had a better short run, which is what happens until it is banned.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:55 am to crimsonian
I just look at it simply.
Maddux's best season (not counting a shortened season) was an ERA of 1.63.
Pedro's best season had an ERA of 1.74.
Maddux allowed less runs in his best. How can you say that Pedro at his peak was better than Maddux, when Maddux had a lower ERA?
And frick people who discount ERA for starting pitchers. The point of the game is to score more runs than the other team. I could give a frick about K's, WHIP, etc., as long as that pitcher allows less runs.
Maddux's best season (not counting a shortened season) was an ERA of 1.63.
Pedro's best season had an ERA of 1.74.
Maddux allowed less runs in his best. How can you say that Pedro at his peak was better than Maddux, when Maddux had a lower ERA?
And frick people who discount ERA for starting pitchers. The point of the game is to score more runs than the other team. I could give a frick about K's, WHIP, etc., as long as that pitcher allows less runs.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 8:58 am to Moustache
Some people fall in love with the K.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 9:01 am to Moustache
quote:I usually like you, but this made me SMDH.
I could give a frick about K's, WHIP, etc
Posted on 8/3/12 at 9:02 am to crimsonian
Agreed. I don't know why strikeouts and WHIP are so important. If you allow people on base, but they don't score, it doesn't matter.
Posted on 8/3/12 at 9:04 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
I usually like you, but this made me SMDH.
I know, I've been called a retard for this line of thinking before, but to me the end all be all of stats for STARTING pitchers is the ERA.
Now the W is f'ing meaningless to me, because the pitcher isn't in control.
I feel like the Pitcher is in COMPLETE control of his ERA.
ERA>K in my opinion. Who cares if a pitcher gets an out via groundball or K, an outs an out.
NOTE: This is only concerning starting pitchers. The K becomes A LOT more important in the pen IMO.
This post was edited on 8/3/12 at 9:06 am
Posted on 8/3/12 at 9:06 am to Moustache
As a matter of fact, a starting pitchers who can get outs without relying on the K can usually give you more IP too.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News