Sure, I am not denying Seaver was one of the best ever, but to say Whitey Ford wasn't is pretty off-base. What do HoF votes have to do with anything? It just means that he was well liked by the sportswriters. Aaron was a great home run hitter, but his skin color hurt him. Ruth was a Yankee, and Yankees are hated by everyone who isn't a Yankee fan. I'm not denying Seaver was a phenominal pitcher, and arguably the best ever. But you act as though the Yankees haven't had any pitching at all over their history. Hell, Ruth could well have been the greatest pitcher ever, but a contract clause while with Boston turned him into an outfielder. My initial point was that our list of greats is longer, by far. I intentionally left out Seaver from the initial post, simply to avoid this argument. Positional players can be compared by their stats. A pitcher's most telling stats are the W/L columns. You can argue that his # of K's makes him the better pitcher all you want. However, it is impossible to prove. Pitching is very subjective. I could argue that Seaver faced a lot of National League hitting. How many times did he strike out a pitcher? On the other hand, you can compare RBI production, number of errors, OBP, number of HRs, etc. for positional players. This makes for a more objective argument. Again, I agree that Seaver is one of the best pitchers ever. My point was that the Yankees have more heroes over the course of their history. And this conversation has gone way OT at this point. It started as a discussion of the Yankees sweeping Chicago.
Yankees should have more heroes since they have a much longer history than the Mets. Just like the Giants have more heroes than the Jets.
Dude you are clueless, Ford never faced a DH, and Seaver did. Damn your bad. PM junc and tell him to help you out.
Okay, so basically, this conversation, as long as it goes on, is going to be you twisting my words to mean what you choose it to, correct? Could you please identify where I claimed Ford ever faced a DH? Actually, don't bother. I didn't. That point was supposed to be to show that Seaver pitched in what I consider a lesser hitting league. Again, it's subjective. But forget it. You're right, and I am wrong. There are you satisfied? See you in October. Just be sure to bring your Kleenex. :up:
Based on what? Inter league 2006? How many times did Ford strike out a pitcher? The NL was stacked in Seavers day. BTW
NL Out scored the AL in: 67 68 70 71 72 74 69, 73, 75 the years the AL led. Guess who won the Cy Young in the NL?
Okay. 67-Cards 68-Tigers 69-Mets 70-O's 71-Pirates 72-A's 73-A's 74-A's 75-Reds 9 year span AL wins 5 and NL wins 4. Not that much domination. If you use Runs scored as a barometer as to the NL being a better league I would counter with the NL pitching overall was worse which is why they scored more runs. What about league era's over the same time frame? 1 stat will not show what you want it to.
He just painted the NL as a "lesser hitting league", which might be true now, but not historically and surely not in the 60's and 70's.
Hitting goes hand and hand with pitching. The reason as to why the NL was a better hitting league in the 60's and 70's (according to you) could be because the weaker pitching was in the NL as well. It doesnt necessarily mean that the hitters themselves were better but their stats may have been due to subpar pitching. AL had some great hitters during that time as well but since they might have gone up against better pitchers overall, the stat would sway towards the NL. You cant cant the one stat without the other.
I know. That was in response to a previous post that wanted to add Carter for the Mets and I responded to him about Carter not being produced by the Mets. You have to read the whole thread Devil...:smile:
when is the first game against the BLue Jays, if we can manage to sweep them thats it, we got the division so far, but we can keep working at securing that spot.
Gratutious Chico Escuela thread-thank you, Hane! http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...520Escuela.jpg Chico Escuela Chico Escuela, played by Garrett Morris, was the Weekend Update sports correspondent. A retired Hispanic ballplayer with limited command of the English language, he wrote the tell-all book Bad Stuff About the Mets (sample: "Tom Seaver - he once borrow Chico's soap and no give it back"). In spring training 1979, Chico's unsuccessful comeback attempt was documented on several Update segments. The character was first introduced in a St. Mickey's Knights of Columbus sketch, but subsequently Escuela appeared solely on Update. Typically he would be introduced by Jane Curtin, thus compelling him to say, "Thank you, Hane." Soon would follow his standard catchphrase: "Baseball been berry, berry good to me!" Sammy Sosa, at the peak of his stardom in the late 1990s, would sometimes repeat that line as a joke, to the media, albeit in his true-to-life strong Hispanic accent.
