POLL Max, Kershaw & JV

[SlinkyRedfoot]

by saying Verlander is better(career wise) because he has a WS ring, you are...

That's false.

 

[williewilliejuan]

I’d go with Kershaw. As a Giants fan, I think his postseason numbers are fabulous.

 

[navamind]

close, but I'd give Kershaw the nod over Verlander because of peaks. all three look like Hall of Famers to me.

 

[flyerhawk]

Verlander.

Last three seasons

JV: 216 IP/Season

KC: 162 IP/Season

Sure. Verlander definitely gets you more innings.

Clayton Kershaw has the lowest WHIP of any modern era starter in baseball history. Verlander is 83rd on the list
Kershaw has the highest ERA+ of any starter in the history of baseball. Verlander is 57th
Kershaw has the lowest ERA of any pitcher in about 90 years.

Kershaw not being dominant in the post-season and his injury woes have made people forget just how dominant a pitcher he has been in his career.

 

[flyerhawk]

close, but I'd give Kershaw the nod over Verlander because of peaks. all three look like Hall of Famers to me.

Kershaw and Scherzer are locks for the Hall. Verlander is not. At least not yet.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Verlander is not.

I disagree. I think he'll make it pretty easily.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Sure. Verlander definitely gets you more innings.

Clayton Kershaw has the lowest WHIP of any modern era starter in baseball history. Verlander is 83rd on the list
Kershaw has the highest ERA+ of any starter in the history of baseball. Verlander is 57th
Kershaw has the lowest ERA of any pitcher in about 90 years.

Kershaw not being dominant in the post-season and his injury woes have made people forget just how dominant a pitcher he has been in his career.

Well, as with milk, you're making a case of which pitcher is better, not which career has been better, and that's the thread subject.

 

[flyerhawk]

Well, as with milk, you're making a case of which pitcher is better, not which career has been better, and that's the thread subject.

The guy with 3 Cy Youngs and who has been an absolutely dominant pitcher his entire career compared to the guy with a single Cy Young and who has had several average to mediocre seasons to the point that his team traded him as a salary dump.

IMO, the only argument that you could use to support Verlander having the better career is that he is 5 years older so it's possible that Kershaw might fade out in his 30s and not be nearly as good.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

had several average to mediocre seasons to the point that his team traded him as a salary dump.

What does Detroit's shitbag situation have to do with this? You think that if they were in any way competitive that they'd have dished him off? Hell no. In the two+ years leading up to the trade to the Astros, he had a 3.33 ERA over 454 IP.

IMO, the only argument that you could use to support Verlander having the better career is that he is 5 years older so it's possible that Kershaw might fade out in his 30s and not be nearly as good.

False.

My argument is "which career would you rather have," and my answer is Verlander's.

No, @MilkSpiller22, that doesn't mean I'm basing it on one season, or else I'd take every single WS winner in history over Barry Bonds. That's ridiculous.

Verlander, Kershaw, and Scherzer are all great pitchers. I tend to think they're all going to be HOF'ers, so if I'm going to take some guy's career, it's the one with the ring, despite the fact that I think the other two are better pitchers.

 

[flyerhawk]

Verlander, Kershaw, and Scherzer are all great pitchers. I tend to think they're all going to be HOF'ers, so if I'm going to take some guy's career, it's the one with the ring, despite the fact that I think the other two are better pitchers.

So it boils down Verland having a single World Series ring? That's just a really weird argument, IMO. At least in baseball. Especially for pitchers.

To each their own.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

So it boils down Verland having a single World Series ring? That's just a really weird argument, IMO. At least in baseball. Especially for pitchers.

No, it doesn't. I think you're stuck on better pitcher. I'm on better career, as in, which one would I rather have.

If you had your choice, would you rather be a pretty good HOF pitcher with a world series ring, or a great HOF pitcher without one? Answer that honestly.

 

[flyerhawk]

No, it doesn't. I think you're stuck on better pitcher. I'm on better career, as in, which one would I rather have.

If you had your choice, would you rather be a pretty good HOF pitcher with a world series ring, or a great HOF pitcher without one? Answer that honestly.

Interesting question. Would you rather have Charlie Morton's career or Clayton Kershaw's career?

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Interesting question. Would you rather have Charlie Morton's career or Clayton Kershaw's career?

You answered a question with a question because you'd lose ground had you actually answered it.

I'll answer yours, though. No. Charlie Morton is a scrub - eleven seasons of sub-average pitching. Clayton Kershaw is an HOF pitcher. Pretty simple. Now your turn.

 

[da55bums]

Not a huge problem because I've already said how I can make my decision.

Verlander is better than Kershaw in the playoffs. They are both not elite playoff pitchers, but one is significantly better than the other. I'd take a pitcher that's okay in the regular season as long as he can perform in the postseason. Kershaw is much better in the regular season but flops in the postseason. That ERA of Kershaw's doesn't transpose over to the playoffs very well and that's a huge red flag for me.

John Lackey = 3 ws rings with 3 different teams
Jon Lester = 3 ws rings with 2 different teams
Curt Schilling = 3 ws rings with 2 different teams

Verlander, Kershaw, Max = 1 ws ring - one is significantly better in the post season? Verlander, Porcello and Max - combined couldn't win a ring together. Porcello now has 1 Cy and 1 WS ring, so does David Price...

.Kershaw currently leads in HOF voting, thus best career so far.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

What does Detroit's shitbag situation have to do with this? You think that if they were in any way competitive that they'd have dished him off? Hell no. In the two+ years leading up to the trade to the Astros, he had a 3.33 ERA over 454 IP.



False.

My argument is "which career would you rather have," and my answer is Verlander's.

No, @MilkSpiller22, that doesn't mean I'm basing it on one season, or else I'd take every single WS winner in history over Barry Bonds. That's ridiculous.

Verlander, Kershaw, and Scherzer are all great pitchers. I tend to think they're all going to be HOF'ers, so if I'm going to take some guy's career, it's the one with the ring, despite the fact that I think the other two are better pitchers.

then i am confused by how you are getting to your conclusion, if you are not basing it on one season, why you bringing up the championship...


are you saying they are so close WITHOUT the championship that just having one makes him have the better career?? Because that i would disagree about too...

sure you would trade in a CY or MVP for a WS ring, but would you trade in two??

 

[flyerhawk]

You answered a question with a question because you'd lose ground had you actually answered it.

I'll answer yours, though. No. Charlie Morton is a scrub - eleven seasons of sub-average pitching. Clayton Kershaw is an HOF pitcher. Pretty simple. Now your turn.

I answered your question with a question as a response to you argument.

Kershaw is a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. Right now, Justin Verlander is a borderline player. That can change.

To be clear, I don't give a shit about any of these guys. This is pure baseball stats.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Kershaw is the best pitcher of the 3 is all I know here.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

I answered your question with a question as a response to you argument.

What?

 

[JohnU]

Verlander gets way too much love IMO... He is seen to be a big time pitcher, which is a joke since he has yet to win a WS game, and has an ERA abover 4.00 in the WS...

How can someone be considered a big time pitcher when he has not been good in the most important games of his career??

You don't measure the value of one single game if the question is about his career. A lot of players stepped up in the World Series -- once -- who have quite middling careers. I could mention Don Larsen ... or Mo Drabowsky.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

You don't measure the value of one single game if the question is about his career. A lot of players stepped up in the World Series -- once -- who have quite middling careers. I could mention Don Larsen ... or Mo Drabowsky.

4’ 5” David Eckstein is a WS MVP.