Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Windy, I stand corrected


MrSenarighi

Recommended Posts

It only took Santana 1/5 the time I thought to lower his ERA below Judy Garlands. If wins meant anything other than timely run support I would say you have yourself one heck of a pitcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Sen

It was a slow night, my beloved had just pounded the Rockies into submission and the Twinks rolled over the hapless Diamondbacks (they are playing more like garden snakes, I can't believe they are considered one of the teams to make the playoffs in NL). Anywho, I just thought I would poke the bear a little and by the replies, it seemed to work. Now, if you will excuse me, I have to look at the 15 replies to my harmless little post, te he te he!

YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE BOARD....YES!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hapless? arizona?? you are thinking about the AA team Colorado Rockies that your white sux beat,pretty impressive wins against a team that would get killed by the saint paul saints I forgot how did santana do yesterday again? grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windy, for the love of god, get an avatar already... that little red X is hurting my eyes. grin.gif

Do you know how to set that up? if not, I can help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you kidding, its way beyond someone of his intelligence...even though it requires little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garland 10-2 7.0 ip 6 H 1 ER

and 1-2 at the plate with an RBI.

Go Hee-Seop

5 1/2 game lead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let us take a full look at the two pitchers....

Career Stats W L ERA H BB SO WHIP AVG K/BB K/9

Santana 50 20 3.45 590 231 777 1.15 .223 3.33 9.76

Garland 56 53 4.54 886 342 478 1.40 .267 1.37 4.92

And since you brought Garland's hit into it

Career Stats AB R H RBI TB BB SO OBP SLG AVG

Santana 20 1 6 2 6 0 2 .300 .300 .300

Garland 12 0 2 1 2 1 2 .231 .167 .167

If you want to discuss who is having the better start to the year, you have a argument. If you want to discuss who is the better pitcher, Garland loses big.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discuss who's the better pitcher? The better pitcher for the 2005 season as of now is John Garland. YOU LOSE BIG, FISHGUY. I don't care about last year, the year before, or 2000. Sox didn't win a championship, nor did the Twins. Who cares about the PAST. It's funny how Twins and Cubs fans dwell and brag about the past. Santana may have been a much better pitcher last year and the year before, but the Sox have 5 starting pitchers that are more effective than Santana this year, 3 of them having lower ERA's, and 3 of them equaling or bettering Santana's win total.

Barry Zito 13 13 81.2 73 Hits 2 Wins 7 Losses 4.41 ERA THIS YEAR

Zito could arguably be one of the best pitchers in MLB over the past few years. Is he better than Garland too because he's pitched better in the past?

Garland is a year younger than Santana, but yet has 5 career more victories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garland is the better pitcher NEVER buddy. There is no one is the whole world that would take your souped up Rick Reed over Santana. Garland is a fifth starter. Santanna is a CY Young winner. You Sox fans must have blinders on to think that Garland is a better pitcher than Johan. And yes, I'm talking about this year. If you asked the Sox players if they would rather have Garland or Santanna, 100% of them would pick Santanna. It's not even close buddy, so don't try to say ANY of your pitchers are better than Santanna. IT JUST AIN'T TRUE.

Judy Garland

K/9 WHIP BAA SO BB

4.38 1.11 .257 42 14

Johan Santana

K/9 WHIP BAA SO BB

11.11 0.89 .209 114 11

It's not hard to put up stats that makes Santana look better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure seems that 3 of our pitcher have better ERA's than Yo-han, BUDDY!!!!!! If I'm not mistaken, that means they have given up fewer runs per 9 innings........, making them more effective pitchers!!!!!!! Isn't the ERA and win totals usually the stats used to compare pitchers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if that wasn't enough for you to chew on G.I JIM I'll just give you the scouting reports from ESPN.

Jon Garland:

Garland has a solid sinking fastball in the low-90s but has been unable to complement it with another plus pitch. His curveball can be a good pitch, but he does not command it well enough. He does not do a good job of changing speeds and winds up in too many hitters' count, which helps explains how a sinkerballer could give up the fourth-most home runs in the AL.

Johan Santana:

Santana has three dominating pitches-a 94-MPH fastball, an 87-MPH slider and a 76-MPH changeup. The changeup is the most devastating, because it comes out of his hand looking just like his fastball. When it arrives 18 MPH slower than the heater, hitters swing and miss by embarrassing margins. The difference between 2003 and 2004 was his ability to locate his pitches, while in the past he relied more on changing speeds. Santana also learned to throw his slider with different breaks at different speeds, giving him a slurve-like alternative to his other pitches.

That and yippee, his ERA is 8 one hundreths of a percent better than Johan. We'll see who has a better ERA at the end of the year. My guess is Johan will be better by almost a run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Willy,

What are you talking about? When was that scouting report? 4th most home runs given up in the AL? Every one of the Twins starters have given up more home runs than Garland's 6.

Home Runs given up this year:

Radke: 14, 2nd worst in the league

Mays: 11

JoHan: 10

Lohse: 9

Silva: 8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Discuss who's the better pitcher? The better pitcher for the 2005 season as of now is John Garland. YOU LOSE BIG, FISHGUY. I don't care about last year, the year before, or 2000. Sox didn't win a championship, nor did the Twins. Who cares about the PAST. It's funny how Twins and Cubs fans dwell and brag about the past. Santana may have been a much better pitcher last year and the year before, but the Sox have 5 starting pitchers that are more effective than Santana this year, 3 of them having lower ERA's, and 3 of them equaling or bettering Santana's win total.

Barry Zito 13 13 81.2 73 Hits 2 Wins 7 Losses 4.41 ERA THIS YEAR

Zito could arguably be one of the best pitchers in MLB over the past few years. Is he better than Garland too because he's pitched better in the past?

Garland is a year younger than Santana, but yet has 5 career more victories.


If Garland loses his next start and Johan wins, is Johan better again? And then if Johan loses, Garland loses, and Halladay wins, is he then the best? And then all three of them lose, and Kyle Lohse gets on a 3 game winning streak he can be the best. Then Jose Lima can throw a shutout and he can be the best. Like you said, who cares about the past. That must mean what you do today is all that matters.

If Michael Cuddyer bats .500 for the next month, hits 10 HR's,and has 20 RBI's, should we say he is better than A-Rod? He would have been better recently, so that would fit your slanted, biased, bend to fit your own logic, wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Garland is a year younger than Santana, but yet has 5 career more victories.


Some of your comparisons are quite valid, but you really should look at the big picture before posting so you don't look quite so dumb.

TRUE it IS FACT that Garland has 6 more career victories than Santana in his career, but you forget that 1/2 of Santanas career was spent in the bullpen. Let me make your comparison a little more complete and you will see there really is no comparison.

Garland: Games Started 139

Wins 56

Santana: Games Started 88

Wins 50

To make it easy lets just give Santana 44 more starts equalling 132 with his current pace and that puts his win total at 75. Nearly 20 wins more with 7 less games started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no way anyone here can take you seriously at all if you really believe your whole rotation is better than Santana. You tell any baseball fan in this country that you would take any of your sux 5 starters over Santana and every single one of them would turn there back and walk away laughing. Lets not forget that the Twins pitching staff has a better ERA than the white sox staff. Your not going too convince anyone on here or anywhere that the white sox staff is better than this twins staff. And your also nuts if you think the sux are going too play better than .600 baseball the whole season.

Garland has been a serious career overachiever, hes shown a glimmer now through what, about 12, 13 starts? Its going too take a little more than 13 starts too convince anyone hes better than the 2004 Cy Young winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Commanche commanche commanche, Down to earth just put your firmly in your place! If you didn't realize that Santana worked out of the bullpen for many years then you are a fool, if you did realize that and tried to slide that BS by us Twins fans you need to be smarter... oh wait, you route for a team that can't win a championship!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

... oh wait, you route for a team that can't win a championship!


but Buzzsaw, don't you root for the Vikings? shocked.gif

Sorry it was just too easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said the White Sox CAN'T win a championship, the Vikings can and will........ some year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sox HAVE won a championship, and some day, will win another one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Sox HAVE won a championship, and some day, will win another one.


Yeah, if no one buys them out to throw the series. grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • SkunkedAgain
      I might have missed a guess, but here are the ones that I noted:   JerkinLips – March 27th, then April 7th Brianf. – March 28th Bobberwatcher – April…. MikeG3Boat – April 10th SkunkedAgain – early April, then April 21st   Definitely a tough year for guesses, as it seemed to be a no-brainer early ice out. Then it got cold and snowed again.
    • mbeyer
      MN DNR posted April 13 as Ice out date for Vermilion
    • Brianf.
      ^^^45 in the morning and 47 in the evening
    • CigarGuy
      👍. What was the water temp in Black Bay? Thanks....
    • Brianf.
      No, that wasn't me.  I drive a 621 Ranger. 
    • CigarGuy
      So, that was you in the camo lund? I'm bummed, I have to head back to the cities tomorrow for a few days, then back up for at least a few weeks. Got the dock in and fired up to get out chasing some crappies till opener!
    • LakeofthewoodsMN
      On the south end...   Lots of ice on the main basin, but it is definitely deteriorating.  Some anglers have been fishing the open water at the mouth of the Rainy River in front of the Lighthouse Gap.  The rest of the basin is still iced over. Pike enthusiasts caught some big pike earlier last week tip up fishing in pre-spawn areas adjacent to traditional spawning areas.  8 - 14' of water using tip ups with live suckers or dead bait such as smelt and herring has been the ticket.  Ice fishing for all practical purposes is done for the year. The focus for the basin moving forward will be pike transitioning into back bays to spawn,  This is open water fishing and an opportunity available as the pike season is open year round on Lake of the Woods. The limit is 3 pike per day with one being able to be more than 40 inches. All fish 30 - 40 inches must be released. With both the ice fishing and spring fishing on the Rainy River being so good, many are looking forward to the MN Fishing Opener on Saturday, May 11th.  It should be epic. On the Rainy River...  An absolutely incredible week of walleye and sturgeon fishing on the Rain Rainy River.     Walleye anglers, as a rule, caught good numbers of fish and lots of big fish.  This spring was one for the books.   To follow that up, the sturgeon season is currently underway and although every day can be different, many boats have caught 30 - 40 sturgeon in a day!  We have heard of fish measuring into the low 70 inch range.  Lots in the 60 - 70 inch range as well.   The sturgeon season continues through May 15th and resumes again July 1st.   Oct 1 - April 23, Catch and Release April 24 - May 7, Harvest Season May 8 - May 15, Catch and Release May 16 - June 30, Sturgeon Fishing Closed July 1 - Sep 30, Harvest Season If you fish during the sturgeon harvest season and you want to keep a sturgeon, you must purchase a sturgeon tag for $5 prior to fishing.    One sturgeon per calendar year (45 - 50" inclusive, or over 75"). Most sturgeon anglers are either a glob of crawlers or a combo of crawlers and frozen emerald shiners on a sturgeon rig, which is an 18" leader with a 4/0 circle hook combined with a no roll sinker.  Local bait shops have all of the gear and bait. Up at the NW Angle...  Open water is continuing to expand in areas with current.  The sight of open water simply is wetting the pallet of those eager for the MN Fishing Opener on May 11th.   A few locals were on the ice this week, targeting pike.  Some big slimers were iced along with some muskies as well.  If you like fishing for predators, LOW is healthy!  
    • Brianf.
      Early bird gets the worm some say...   I have it on good authority that this very special angler caught no walleyes or muskies and that any panfish caught were released unharmed.        
    • smurfy
      got mine done........for the cabin.....ready for summer festivities!!!!!!   there was still frost in the ground...........but good gawd are the lakes low!!!!!
    • CigarGuy
      Just 1, 50" muskie🫣
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.