Schillling ranks the top 5 pitchers in the majors

[Sox]

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/8564/lester-among-schillings-top-5-pitchers

 

he has Lester as #4.

[Palodios]

Wow, leaving out Lincecum? In general, this list makes me think Schilling is a little AL-biased.

[Sox]

I think Lincecum should take Cliff Lee's place, Lee is a bit overrated because of his low BB/9, the rest of his stats aren't impressive.

[Will617]

I feel like Josh Johnson or Wainwright (had he not blew out his arm) could deserve to be on that list.

I like Lester a lot, and I think he's underrated, but I'm not sure whether he deserves a spot in the top 5. Top 10, definitely. Lincecum has some concerns that would make me hesitate before putting him on the list, but if you're looking at the recent history more than trying to project than he definitely deserves to be there.

[Sox]

I feel like Josh Johnson or Wainwright (had he not blew out his arm) could deserve to be on that list.

I like Lester a lot, and I think he's underrated, but I'm not sure whether he deserves a spot in the top 5. Top 10, definitely. Lincecum has some concerns that would make me hesitate before putting him on the list, but if you're looking at the recent history more than trying to project than he definitely deserves to be there.

 

I can't think of anyone other than Roy Halladay & Felix Hernandez that are definitely better without any argument, Wainweight shouldn't be in the argument anymore because of his injury, MLB.com also ranked Lester #4 as well, but they had Lincecum ahead of him instead of Lee, CC Sabathia has been in the decline lately, check out this article as it talks about CC Sabathia's decline:

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/622087-2011-fantasy-projections-no-58-new-york-yankees-cc-sabathia-is-on-the-decline

[Youk Of The Nation]

I figured Curt Schilling's top 5 anything would all be 'Curt Schilling'. Jesus, does that man love to talk, and does he love to talk about Curt Schilling.

[Dojji]

Maybe it's because he hasn't been sharp when I've had the chance to see him in action, but I'm not sure why everyone is so bowled over by Lincecum. He's a talent to be sure, but is he really *that* good?

[VA Sox Fan]

I figured Curt Schilling's top 5 anything would all be 'Curt Schilling'. Jesus' date=' does that man love to talk, and does he love to talk about Curt Schilling.[/quote']

 

That's ok, he can talk about 2004 all he wants, I never get tired of that.

[Dojji]

I figured Curt Schilling's top 5 anything would all be 'Curt Schilling'. Jesus' date=' does that man love to talk, and does he love to talk about Curt Schilling.[/quote']

 

He's not a big league ballplayer anymore, and he's out of the MLB loop for the most part. For anything that happened after about 2008 he's as much a passenger as we are. What else would you go to Schilling's blog to hear about? Republican politics? If you don't want to read about Curt Schilling, why are you at his blog?

[Dojji]

Wow' date=' leaving out Lincecum? In general, this list makes me think Schilling is a little AL-biased.[/quote']

 

Bearing in mind that Lincecum debuted in Schilling's final year as a pro. His list seems heavily biased in favor of people he was around to watch when he played.

[Meh]

idk, I think Mo gets overlooked since he's a closer but the dude is amazing. He may be the greatest closer, but he should be known as one of the best pitchers in the game.

[Divinity]

Maybe it's because he hasn't been sharp when I've had the chance to see him in action' date=' but I'm not sure why everyone is so bowled over by Lincecum. He's a talent to be sure, but is he really *that* good?[/quote']

 

Yes he's *that* good. Lincecum won his second consecutive NL Cy Young award becoming the first NL pitcher to win back-to-back since Randy Johnson won four straight with the Diamondbacks from 1999-2002. Overall, Lincecum is just the fourth NL pitcher to win back-to-back. The remaining two are Greg Maddux and Sandy Koufax. He was also the first second-year player to win the Cy Young since Dwight Gooden and Bret Saberhagen both won in 1985.

[Youk Of The Nation]

He's not a big league ballplayer anymore' date=' and he's out of the MLB loop for the most part. For anything that happened after about 2008 he's as much a passenger as we are. What else would you go to Schilling's blog to hear about? Republican politics? If you don't want to read about Curt Schilling, why are you at his blog?[/quote']

 

I'm not at his blog. I didn't even click the link. I was just making a humorous comment about Curt Schillings' willingness to talk to anyone who will listen long enough about everything that everyone has ever had an opinion on. Way to overreact though.

[Sox]

idk' date=' I think Mo gets overlooked since he's a closer but the dude is amazing. He may be the greatest closer, but he should be known as one of the best pitchers in the game.[/quote']

 

look, I love Mo, but a starter is a 100 times more valuable than any closer, give any decent starter the ball & tell him to pitch one inning, he can throw his best stuff, not worry about stamina, & not worry that the hitters would adapt after the second time or third time they face him, & they'd be as good if not better than Mo.

[Divinity]

Thats a big slap in the face to Mo', you're basicly claiming he's a decent pitcher that only excels because he's a closer? Hitters know whats coming from Mo and it doesn't help them one bit. His cutter is nothing short of perfection.

 

[youtube=Mo]dMVXjRGTtG0

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

He's not calling Mo bad or anything. We all know and when I say all I mean Red Sox fans know how dominant Mo is. He's implying that a starter is much more valuable then a closer. I agree with him.

[Sox]

exactly, I didn't say he was bad, he's the best closer of all time, period, that doesn't make him the best pitcher of all time, or anything close to that, as a closer, he's #1, as a pitcher, he's not even close to #1.

[Divinity]

give any decent starter the ball & tell him to pitch one inning' date=' he can throw his best stuff, not worry about stamina, & not worry that the hitters would adapt after the second time or third time they face him, & [b']they'd be as good if not better than Mo[/b].

 

 

It sounded like you were comparing Mo's talents to that of a decent starting pitcher, claiming any of them could be just as good as him if limited to 1 inning, if not better. So any 'decent' starting pitcher could be the greatest closer of all time if they decided to switch roles?

[Palodios]

look' date=' I love Mo, but a starter is a 100 times more valuable than any closer, give any decent starter the ball & tell him to pitch one inning, he can throw his best stuff, not worry about stamina, & not worry that the hitters would adapt after the second time or third time they face him, & they'd be as good if not better than Mo.[/quote']

 

:stop:

[Sox]

It sounded like you were comparing Mo's talents to that of a decent starting pitcher' date=' claiming any of them could be just as good as him if limited to 1 inning, if not better. So any 'decent' starting pitcher could be the greatest closer of all time if they decided to switch roles?[/quote']

 

well, give Roy Halladay the ball & tell him to pitch one inning every few days, tell him to throw his best stuff, he doesn't need to save his best stuff for the right situations, & doesn't need to save his arm, so he can throw as hard as he could. he'd get 60 saves with an ERA of 0.6.

ok Halladay is the best pitcher in the majors right now, so say, give the ball to a middle of the pack #2 or 3 starter, like say Chris Carpenter, you're telling me he can't save 40 games with a sub 3 ERA? knowing that he only has to pitch one inning without holding back?

if a guy has an OPS of 1.4 & only has 40 ABs, you can't say he's the best hitter in the majors, one thing that separates closers from starters is stamina, the other thing is repertoire, good pitchers can survive one inning on just one plus pitch, but if you want to pitch 6+ innings, you need more than just one plus pitch.

you're taking it as an insult, its not that Rivera is bad, he's the best at his job, its his job that isn't close to being as valuable as a starter, even a classic innings eater is more valuable than a closer, no matter how good that closer is.

there's one thing that most closers have in common, they're all failed starters, they don't have what it takes to pitch half a game every few days, most closers get converted in the minors.

[Dojji]

Carpenter is not a middle of the pack #2 or #3 starter. A middle of the pack #2 or #3 starter would be somewhere in the range of Gil Meche back before he got hurt, or the Andy Pettitte of 2-3 years ago. Carp's had his injuries, but when healthy he's a #1 starter.

 

Besides, you're wrong. There's nothing about being a starter that would magically make you more effective in the bullpen. Starting is about a good arsenal of secondary pitches and good platoon matchups against both sides of the plate. If you have that , you can get through the lineup more times without losing all effectiveness. That doesn't mean that you always dominate the first time through like relievers have to. That's also a question about arsenal, just a different one, one that depends more on one to two really good pitches than on the deeper arsenal of most SP's.

 

There's obviously exceptions and multiple deeper factors to this but the point is that starting is one role, relief is another, and success in either role doesn't guarantee success in the other.

 

And closers are converted starters frequently, but they're converted starters of a specific kind, the kind with a couple overpowering pitches and a lack of durability, command or secondary stuff to get them through the lineup multiple times. The same attributes that keeps most "born relievers" up in the pen when a team is desperate for starting talent. So basically, not so much "failed starter" as "misfiled as a starter in the hope of developmental progress that didn't come."

[Palodios]

I'm having trouble figuring out where to begin. So your argument here is a HOF lock, multiple Cy Young winner like Hallady would be a good closer? Isn't that obvious? But 60 saves? Its incredibly rare to have that many chances.

 

Sub 3 ERA? Mo has had a sub-2 ERA for the majority of his seasons as a closer, with a sub-1 WHIP. All while in the most brutal division in baseball, during the primes of Manny/Ortiz and throughout the steroid era. And he's done it consistently for fourteen years.

[Dojji]

I do wanna say that I agree with Sox that there's something to be said for the skillset closers lack or don't demonstrate, the ability to get through a lineup multiple times, being factored in.

[Sox]

I do wanna say that I agree with Sox that there's something to be said for the skillset closers lack or don't demonstrate' date=' the ability to get through a lineup multiple times, being factored in.[/quote']

 

that's exactly my point, you get better results & look better on short burts, but when you pitch 7+ innings, you save your arm & try not to throw as hard as you can, you try to save your best stuff for sticky situations, & the lineup sees a lot of your pitches, which makes you more vulnerable.

 

my whole point is, no matter how good a closer is, starters are a lot more valuable, the starter doesn't have to be an ace to be more valuable, just pitch 180+ innings with league average ERA, & you're now automatically more valuable than any closer.

 

& I'm in no way saying Mo is bad, he's the best closer of all time, but he's not in the discussion of the best pitchers of all time.

[SoxSport]

Tough call because of the disparity between the leagues. Halladay, for example, was very good in Toronto, almost unbeatable in Philly. Sabathia is helped by Yankee stadium. Lee is better in the NL. Hernandez is a slow starter, and doesn't get much run support. Lincecum had a off-year last year, for him.

 

In terms of expected performance this year, I would say Halladay, Lester, Lee,Lincecum,Sabathia.

Dark horses: Jiminez, Kershaw, Buchholz. Buchholz had that one bad start at the end of the year, which may have cost him the Cy Young. He was ahead in ERA until that start.

[UKVic]

Just a thought on this - If you take a dominant starter and move him to being a closer surely he will not have as many save chances as you will have weaked the starting pitching ??

[Will617]

In terms of expected performance this year, I would say Halladay, Lester, Lee,Lincecum,Sabathia.

Dark horses: Jiminez, Kershaw, Buchholz. Buchholz had that one bad start at the end of the year, which may have cost him the Cy Young. He was ahead in ERA until that start.

 

Buchholz really doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the conversation for top-5. I think Lester is borderline, I would put him in but I might be biased. Same with CC (except I don't think CC is a top-5 pitcher going forward). Jimenez could be in the discussion, I don't think that Kershaw is (not that he's a bad pitcher, I just think the other guys are a tier above).

[ORS]

Top 5, looking forward to the next 5 years (isn't this what really matters), starting this year:

 

Lincecum, Hernandez, Lester, Hanson, Price

 

That's who I would bet on, but I can see several others making the list.

[TeddyBallGame9]

How sad for the Guardians. They had 2 of Schilling's top 5 at the same time!

 

I think Cliff Lee certainly belongs in there.

 

Also, Schilling is a class act and no Schilling no 2004 pennant.