bronxxbomber wrote: BronXBombers51 wrote: HOOTIE wrote:
bronxxbomber wrote:after the evidence, i'll stop my bias as a carpenter owner and admit that clemens was definitely the best pitcher, but i still believe that carpenter was the most valuable pitcher to his team.
How can the best pitcher, not also be the most valuable to his team?
I think he might be implying that Clemens wasn't as vital to Houston's success because they had other aces like Pettitte and Oswalt while St. Louis relied on Carp to be their stopper. Therefore since Carp was the undisputed ace, and the guy who had to carry that staff, he was more valuable to the Cards than Clemens was to the 'Stros.
I don't agree with that thought but I think that might be what he's trying to say.
pretty much what i mean.
The best pitcher, the one with the most value, is also the teams most valuable. You are adding making post season, wins, to the criteria. But even if we do that, Clemens was more valuable.
Cards were 11 games ahead of Houston. Which team would be better off without their ace? Houston won wildcard by only 1 game. Houston is no where without Clemens, while Cards still probably win division.
Cards era 3.49
Astros era 3.51
Cards minus Carpenter was a 3.61 era
Astros minus Clemens was a 3.79 era