RealGM

Right now i would have no faith in Daisuke in a playoff game. He has been in such a slump of things of late it will be hard to rely on him. But he's the best option for the Sox number 3. Beckett is the best pitcher out of the group, Wang isn't too far behind. Both Clemens and Schilling big game pitchers and still got enough to show up and help their respective teams win big games. Pettite's got big game experience. Basically in ranking the pitchers for the a playoff series it would go: 1. Beckett, 2. Wang 3. Schilling/Clemens, 5. Pettite 6. Daisuke. I hate to say it, but I'd rather have the Yankees big three.

1. Beckett 2. Wang 3. Pettitte 4. DiceK 5. Clemens/Schill....

I'll take the Yankees, but of course I'm a homer

Give me Boston.

I'm going to take Boston, but really only cause I don't know how much Clemens can provide right now with his arm injury. Dice-K has been horrible lately, hopefully he can bounce back with an extra day rest.

If I had to rank them I would go.

1. Beckett
2. Pettitte
3. Wang
4. Schilling
5. Dice-K
6. Clemens

I'd probably rank them:

1. Beckett
2. Wang (He's a groundball freak)
3. Daisuke
4. Pettitte
5. Schilling
6. OldLOL

1. Pettitte
2. Beckett
3. Dice-K
4. Wang
5. Schilling
6. Clemens

I'd Take Bostons

Ranks:
Beckett
Wang
Petite
Schilling
Dice-k
Clemens

I'd take the Yankees (here comes the storm).

Ranking:

1. Beckett
2. Wang
3. Pettitte
4. Dice-K
5. Clemens
6. Fat (Please Use More Appropriate Word) Who Should Never Open His Mouth Again


I'm hoping, though, that the Yanks Big 3 will turn into Wang, Pettitte and Hughes.

gunnabdaschwab09 wrote:Ranking:

1. Beckett
2. Wang
3. Pettitte
4. Dice-K
5. Clemens
6. Fat (Please Use More Appropriate Word) Who Should Never Open His Mouth Again

You listed Clemens twice.

[quote="Basketball Jesus"]-= original quote snipped =-



You listed Clemens twice.[/quote]

Walked right into that.

hahahahahahahahahahahah

Red Sox

Schilling vs. Pettitte is a wash. Both aging former aces who are now very solid #3's who really know how to pitch big games.

Clemens is done. Dice-K hasn't been all that impressive, but at least he can still play.

Beckett is better than Wang in every concievable way.

litex wrote:Schilling vs. Pettitte is a wash. Both aging former aces who are now very solid #3's who really know how to pitch big games.

Clemens is done. Dice-K hasn't been all that impressive, but at least he can still play.

Beckett is better than Wang in every concievable way.

When Beckett is right, he's better than Wang. But this is the same Beckett that posted a 5.00 ERA last year. To say he's better than Wang in every conceivable way is laughable. He wasn't better in every conceivable way when he was doing his best Eric Milton impression last year.

cmaff051 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



When Beckett is right, he's better than Wang. But this is the same Beckett that posted a 5.00 ERA last year. To say he's better than Wang in every conceivable way is laughable. He wasn't better in every conceivable way when he was doing his best Eric Milton impression last year.

Beckett

Anybody who watched him realized there was nothing unlucky about his performance last year. Much like Randy Johnson's last year when everybody thought he was getting unlucky because he was striking out a good amount of guys and giving up less than a hit an inning. They looked at his peripherals, but didn't watch the games when every time somebody reached base against RJ he would hang his slider and the hitters would hit it to the moon.

Similar thing happened with Beckett. He wasn't get unlucky. He just couldn't throw his curveball for strikes consistently and his fastball command was ****. Hitters smacked his straight, badly located fastball out of the park. Nothing "unlucky" about that.

It wouldn't suprise me if 2006 was an outlier for him either, but to say that Wang is better than Beckett in every conceivable way is very funny.

cmaff051 wrote:Anybody who watched him realized there was nothing unlucky about his performance last year. Much like Randy Johnson's last year when everybody thought he was getting unlucky because he was striking out a good amount of guys and giving up less than a hit an inning. They looked at his peripherals, but didn't watch the games when every time somebody reached base against RJ he would hang his slider and the hitters would hit it to the moon.

Similar thing happened with Beckett. He wasn't get unlucky. He just couldn't throw his curveball for strikes consistently and his fastball command was ****. Hitters smacked his straight, badly located fastball out of the park. Nothing "unlucky" about that.

It wouldn't suprise me if 2006 was an outlier for him either, but to say that Wang is better than Beckett in every conceivable way is very funny.

Oh I'm not saying he was unlucky: his BABIP actually suggest he was a bit lucky (.270 last season) and LD%/GB%/FB% are all within career norms. I watched him pitch on a regular basis and he was throwing John Wasdin specials when he was behind in the count. The weird thing was he'd be alternately good/awful from batter to batter so it wasn't as if it was a sudden disappearance of ability. He just had this mentality that every time he fell behind in the count he could blow a couple of fastballs past the hitter and all is well. Yeah, that doesn't work all that well when the hitters were sitting on the damn thing the entire time.

Wang, on the other hand, well....power sinkerballers are just awesome.