Roy Halladay

Doc just beat KC. he went the distance of shutout ball
Record= 10-1( best record for the best pitcher in the LEAGUE )😀

Originally posted by quackquack
Everyone knows the AL East is better than Central but Santana is better than Halladay.

Halladay never led the league in ERA and won one CY Young.
Santana led the league in ERA three times (plus is leading the league this year) and has two Cy Youngs.

As for consistency, Sanatana has finished in the top 5 ALL of the last years. In fact Santana's ca ...[text shortened]... itcher too but he has years with 4.20 and 3.71 and Santana has never had "ordinary" years.

I guess you didn't understand ANYTHING of what we had just said about comparing their stats? Jebus

Originally posted by no1marauder
Santana's 4-1 with sub 3.00 ERAs against both Boston and the Yankees since 2003.

easier to do when the batters don't see you very often. MLB hitters can figure out a pitcher if they see him enough times.

Originally posted by love4chess
Doc just beat KC. he went the distance of shutout ball
Record= 10-1( best record for the best pitcher in the LEAGUE )😀

Another domination by the Doc. He should be 12-1 if the bullpen hadn't blown those 2 games.


Greinke's great but i wish he was in the AL East so we could do a real comparison between the two

Originally posted by uzless
I guess you didn't understand ANYTHING of what we had just said about comparing their stats? Jebus

I UNDERSTAND what you are saying but I just don't agree. The fact that Boston and the Yankees have been great and are in Halladay's division does not make up for the fact that Santana has been better through out his career.

Even this year, when Halladay is great (10-1 with a 2.77 is awesome), Santana has a 2.00 ERA and has only one start (when he gave up 4 earned runs) that has not been a quality start. Santana not only has been better previously is his career; it is at least arguable that he is better is 2009 too.

Originally posted by quackquack
Santana not only has been better previously is his career; it is at least arguable that he is better is 2009 too.

What a joke.

Santana has a 2.00 ERA vs. Halladay 2.77. Percentage wise that difference is huge.
Sanatana is great every single start (has thrown one non-quality start all year - in which he gave up 4 earned runs), he has been better. In fact Santana has given up only 16 earned runs vs. Halladay's 28.
If you only count games against Boston and New York (like some people do), this year they both pitched well against those teams once.
Your inability to look past win-loss record that is the joke.

Originally posted by quackquack
Your inability to look past win-loss record that is the joke.

That's quite ironic considering you're continually barking on about earned runs and ERA.

The more wins notwithstanding, Halladay also has better control and stamina than Santana and induces more groundball and quick outs as well makiing him the most efficient pitcher in baseball as well.

And it's nice to compare ERAs but Halladay has already pitched 28 more innings this year than Santana. Too bad the Mets couldn't have a more efficient pitcher to help them through those later innings that trouble them so much... 🙂

Halladay has 3 more shut outs in his career than Santana has complete games.

Originally posted by uzless
easier to do when the batters don't see you very often. MLB hitters can figure out a pitcher if they see him enough times.

so for some reason, after all these years, MLB hitters haven't figured out Santana or Halladay.😀

Originally posted by quackquack
Santana has a 2.00 ERA vs. Halladay 2.77. Percentage wise that difference is huge.
Sanatana is great every single start (has thrown one non-quality start all year - in which he gave up 4 earned runs), he has been better. In fact Santana has given up only 16 earned runs vs. Halladay's 28.
If you only count games against Boston and New York (like some ...[text shortened]... d well against those teams once.
Your inability to look past win-loss record that is the joke.

Teams Santana has faced this year

Pit .464
Was .273
SF .527
Bos .579
Atl .491
Phi .600
Fla .466
Was .273
Mil .579
Fla .466
Cin .518

Avg win % is .428


Teams Halladay has faced this year

KAN .429
LAA .509
Bal .421
Atl .491
Chw .464
NYY .589
LAA .509
Bal .421
Chw .464
Tex .589
Min .483
Cle .424
Det .545

Avg win % is .487

Santana
W-L 7-3 ERA 2.00 K 89 Walks 21 WHIP 1.11

Halladay
W-L 10-1 ERA 2.52 K 88 Walks 12 WHIP 1.02

Originally posted by uzless
Teams Santana has faced this year

Pit .464
Was .273
SF .527
Bos .579
Atl .491
Phi .600
Fla .466
Was .273
Mil .579
Fla .466
Cin .518

Avg win % is .428


Teams Halladay has faced this year

KAN .429
LAA .509
Bal .421
Atl .491
Chw .464
NYY .589
LAA .509
Bal .421
Chw .464
Tex .589
Min ...[text shortened]... W-L 7-3 ERA 2.00 K 89 Walks 21 WHIP 1.11

Halladay
W-L 10-1 ERA 2.52 K 88 Walks 12 WHIP 1.02

Those avg win%s are not reflective of performance. You need to weigh each teams winning percentage by the number of starts each pitcher has made against that team to get a more accurate indicator of who has faced the better teams.

Your homework assignment is due by 3:00 p.m. today.

Originally posted by darvlay
Halladay has 3 more shut outs in his career than Santana has complete games.

Do you regard either as a meaningful stat in this era?

Originally posted by darvlay
Halladay has 3 more shut outs in his career than Santana has complete games.

If you have a good closer, most teams will nor have many complete games (regardless of who is starting). I would not look at it as a negative at all if a guy pitches 8 and hands it over to guy whose job is to finish it off.

All these team percentages prove nothing.
First of all, if you faced the Yankees (a top AL team with a high winning percentage when Wang started with his 34.50 ERA you were likely to win). Of course if the balls were blowing out of Yankee stadium your WHIP and ERA would be high. More often you might face a good team's 5th starter instead of their first starter and the teams winning percentage is much lower.
Second, some teams such as Washington have low winning percentages becuase they have awful pitching but much better hitting. To get an indication of average ERA/ WHIP you can't just look at the winning percentage, you need to look at different stats

But one thing you can look at is Santana's ERA since he became a full time pitcher:
AL: 2.99, 3.07, 2.61, 2.87, 2.77 and 3.33
NL: 2.53, 2.00
Santana led the league three times in ERA and the durability argument is a bit of joke too as Santana twice (including last year) led his league in innings pitched) and has pitched over 200 innnings 5 years in a row. Santana led the AL in WHIP 4 consective years.

Now Halladay is great too, but his career ERA is 3.46 is higher than Santana's worst season. Halliday never led the league in ERA and led the league in WHIP once. He led the league is innings three times and has pitched over 200 innings three consecutive years. In fact in '04 and '05 Halladay did not even break 150 innings either year.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Do you regard either as a meaningful stat in this era?

I regard it as a great indicator of his efficiency and stamina.